UNHINGED: Mitt Romney Lies About Obama Remarks He Agrees With

Posted by on July 19, 2012 at 12:00 pm. 8 Comments :

Ever since President Obama delivered a speech wherein he praised America’s innovators and entrepreneurs, the Romney campaign, and the press, have been distorting his remarks by extracting a single sentence in order to imply that Obama is anti-business. The segment of the speech below shows what Obama said with the out-of-context sentence in bold:

“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.“

Obama was obviously referring to roads and bridges in that quote. He went on to cite as examples firefighters, the GI Bill, and the Golden Gate Bridge. It could not be more clear. Nevertheless, Romney hit the campaign trail to intentionally lie about what the President said. But the absurdity of his distortion just went up a notch. In his stump speech, Romney is now blasting the President’s remarks even while he is saying exactly the same thing. Just prior to his criticism of Obama, Romney says…

“I know that you recognize a lot of people help you in a business. Perhaps the banks, the investors, there’s no question your mom and dad, your schoolteachers, the people that provide roads, the fire, the police. A lot of people help.”

So how is that different from what Obama said?

Mitt Romney's Debt Reduction PlanActually, there is a difference. Obama supports firefighters, teachers, and police. He wants to expand their ranks, which would also create thousands of new jobs while benefiting society. Romney is opposed to such spending that he regards as government bloat. Last month he came out fiercely objecting to more government jobs of this specific type:

“[Obama] wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more fireman, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”

Try to follow along here. First Romney knowingly misquotes Obama. Then Romney castigates Obama for saying the exact same thing that he is saying. And what he is saying is something he has previously objected to bitterly. Makes perfect sense – if you’re a lobotomized chimpanzee in a coma. Otherwise you have to be scratching your head. As I previously wrote, Romney is very concerned about helping the American people:

That’s right. The American people need help, and not the kind that President Obama is proposing. They don’t need fires extinguished by lazy civil servants. Real Americans will pick up their garden hoses and attack the blaze from their rooftops. Forest and prairie fires are actually a cheap method of clearing unsightly trees and brush. And paramedics only serve to exacerbate the socialist notion that victims of heart attacks and car accidents are “entitled” to life-saving emergency care.

The American people don’t need more police either. Protection from robberies and assaults is only sought by pussies and the French. And besides, if you really want police protection you can just start earning more money and move to a wealthy community where more officers are deployed and private security can be acquired for hefty fee. This is America, dammit. If you can’t get rich and pay for your own security, that’s your fault. And if you don’t stockpile weapons in your home, then you don’t really love your family. Just ask Mitt Romney (shooter of varmints) if he relies on the government for protection (well, except for all those secret service agents that cost taxpayers millions of dollars).

And don’t even get me started on teachers. What a waste of money that could have been spent on invading Iran. It’s not like America is the stupidest country in the world. At 37th worldwide there’s like 100 other countries that are stupider (and 36 that are smarterer).
Mitt Romney - We're Not StupidAgain the solution is simple. Send your children to expensive private schools like Romney’s Cranbrook, where they can get a superior education while traumatizing other students because they look different than you. The kids that are stuck in overcrowded public schools should stop whining and be grateful for community colleges and the jobs awaiting them at McDonalds. Romney has finally shown the courage to put an end to the fallacy that our children are the future when, in reality, they are just a bunch of germ-ridden fiscal burdens. Although the end result of this might make it harder for Romney to live up to his campaign slogan: We’re Not Stupid!

The Obama campaign has released this video that nicely summarizes how Romney will say anything to smear Obama:

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

Fox News Again Ignores Key Results Of Its Own Poll

Posted by on July 19, 2012 at 4:00 am. NO Comments :

You may not have heard that Fox News released a poll yesterday. The reason for that is that Fox News barely made any mention of it themselves. And when they did bring it up, it was to trumpet results that advanced their partisan agenda. Here is a selection of what Fox considered to be the pertinent headlines from their survey:

    Fox News: Nearly two-thirds of voters say government is the problem
    Fox News: 37 percent of voters say they are better off than four years ago
    Fox News: Voters pick Condi Rice as Romney running mate
    Fox Nation: 37% of Voters Say They Are Better Off Than Four Years Ago
    Fox Nation: 64% of Voters Say Government is the Problem

Notice anything missing? How about:

If the presidential election were held today, how would you vote?
Obama 45% / Romney 41%

That’s right. Fox decided to bury what any other news enterprise would regard as the lede. And it’s not the first time they’ve done this either. In fact, the only time Fox ever publishes the result of any Obama/Romney poll is when Obama is behind.

Another interesting question in the poll that Fox swept aside was this curiously phrased inquiry:

“Some people support a tax increase on high-income earners because they believe the country needs more revenue to reduce the national debt and the better-off can afford it. Others oppose tax increases on high-income earners because they believe high earners are the people who own small businesses, create jobs and spend a bigger share of the money to keep the economy going. Which do you agree with more – those who support or oppose tax increases on high-income earners?”

That is not exactly a testament to fairness and balance. First of all, it makes those who favor higher taxes appear to be interested only in gouging the rich. The truth is that higher taxes for the wealthy is actually aimed at reversing a trend wherein the middle class has been burdened with more and more of the nation’s debt over the past thirty years. It’s an acknowledgement that an equitable nation does not tax the most fortunate at a lower rate than everyone else.

The Real Job CreatorsSecondly, the question falsely characterizes the rich as “job creators” (click image to enlarge chart). However, most independent economists agree that jobs are created by consumer demand, not the wealth of entrepreneurs. Furthermore, the assertion that the rich spend a bigger share of their money is utterly absurd. Poor and middle class citizens spend nearly 100% of their earnings on trivialities like rent and groceries and medicine. The rich put far more of their funds into savings, retirement, and investments.

Despite the grossly biased phrasing of the question, a clear majority, 52 percent, of the respondents said they support tax increases on high-income earners, with 42% opposing. Imagine how much more support there might have been for raising taxes on the rich if the question had not been so biased. And imagine how upset Fox must have been to see the results after working so hard to produce the opposite.

It’s no wonder that Fox has tried to sweep their own poll under the rug. These surveys are expensive and they aren’t undertaken for recreation. The fact that Fox would shell out for this data and then downplay it shows how desperate they are to skew their reporting to advance their conservative agenda. And that goal far outweighs any sense of duty to be ethical journalists.

Update: To elaborate on the tendency of Fox News to only report polls that are unfavorable for Obama, This morning they published the results of a New York Times/CBS News poll that had Romney leading 45-43 (within the margin of error). But they still have not reported the results of their own poll showing Obama ahead 45-41.


Video Mangler James O’Keefe Strikes (Out) Again

Posted by on July 18, 2012 at 7:02 pm. 3 Comments :

James O'KeefeOn some level you have to admire the spunk of crocumentary maker James O’Keefe. It seems that no matter how many times he releases a video project that is quickly debunked, making him the object of ridicule, he bounces back and releases another unphased.

In the latest episode, O’Keefe sought to portray a couple of union reps as willing to support a fraudulent effort to create useless make-work jobs. The video was posted on Breitbart News, where O’Keefe is the official videographer. As usual, O’Keefe grossly misedited the video to make it appear that something untoward was occurring. Instead, he made himself appear to be a stammering dolt. The union reps, John Hutchings and Ronald Tocci, were openly skeptical of what O’Keefe was proposing. They wondered whether O’Keefe’s operation was remediating toxic soil or otherwise serving a useful purpose. O’Keefe responded…

O’Keefee I: There are people who have seen merit in what we’re doing, actually from the more green circles.
Tocci: But why would they see that, besides the jobs that they can create, what are you doing for the environment?
O’Keefee I: Well, Basically what we want to talk to you guys about…
Tocci: I’m not knocking it. It’s just I gotta understand it.
O’Keefee I: You know…I mean…basically there’s not…alright, people do see merit in what we’re doing somehow. Especially from…and they’re having people that have been wanting to provide their resources in terms of providing federal and local funds for us. And getting…you know…
O’Keefee II: (Interrupting) We’re putting people to work. We’re keeping people employed. You know.

Did any of that make any sense at all? It was clear that the union guys weren’t buying it. They offered to help get O’Keefe get into the legitimate business of retrofitting homes to meet environmental standards. They also suggested the project be directed at digging on construction sites to identify obstacles or artifacts. They were trying to steer the O’Keefees into some sort of legitimate enterprise. Media Matters put together a helpful video demonstrating O’Keefe’s deliberate deceit.

O’Keefe tried repeatedly to get the union reps to say that they have politicians in their pockets, but they were consistent in saying that they would only be able to get support based on the merits of the project. Everything that O’Keefe attempted to allege was shot down in the nearly hour long raw video that he’s confidant no one will watch. And his efforts to smear the union reps were pitifully unsuccessful. They were interviewed about the hoax later and said…

“We figured they were shysters. We tried to be courteous. They were young kids; first thing that comes to mind is that its young idealists, like Occupy Wall Street. We sized it up even half-way through the meeting when they couldn’t explain what they did with the dirt.”

The Union reps made no promises to O’Keefe, but sent them away insisting that their superior get in touch. So once again O’Keefe has proven nothing but how lame he is. And yet he soldiers on in his pursuit of ever more ridiculous scams.


Not So Breitbart: The Stupidest Defense Of Mitt Romney’s Tax Return Stonewall Yet

Posted by on July 18, 2012 at 3:43 pm. 3 Comments :

If you were waiting for a slam-dunk idiotic justification for allowing Mitt Romney to continue to conceal his tax returns, your wait is over. And the source of this numbskullery is just who you might have guessed.

John Nolte of Breitbart News posted an item today headlined, “Romney Would be Insane to Release More Tax Returns, Unless….” That’s a pretty solid assertion that, pending some surprise revelation, Romney should continue to keep his mouth shut. But wait until you hear the reasoning. Breitbrat Nolte starts out stating that two of his most strongly held beliefs are world peace and that all politicians should release at least the last five years of their tax returns. Then he sets about explaining why he is abandoning his principles.

“I hate war and nuclear weapons and I’m big on transparency in government and even bigger on fully vetting candidates, especially presidential candidates — regardless of party.

“Those are my values and my principles. And in a perfect world, I would currently be standing side-by-side with the media and the Obama campaign demanding Romney release at least five years of his tax returns.

“But I’m looking out my window right now and the rivers are not chocolate and the clouds are not cotton candy and the media is not objective and the President of the United States is not honest. In other words, it’s not perfect.”

So Breitbrat Nolte is declaring that the beliefs he asserts are core to his personal values are expendable if the world is not perfect. The next question, of course, is when has the world ever been perfect? By this standard, Nolte is saying that he never has to abide by any principles at all since they are only operative when the world is perfect. And with respect to the subject at hand, neither does Mitt Romney.

Swiss MittBut Nolte doesn’t stop there. He complains that Romney should not be subject to a “unilateral disarmament,” which he contends would be the result of Romney being more forthcoming with his taxes. He says that for Romney to relent would “hand six feet of oppo-research over to Team Obama.” Except that the unilateral disarmament was already undertaken by President Obama who has released over a decade of tax returns, compared to Romney’s one year. And even that is in dispute as new information shows that he has failed to release pertinent parts of his 2010 return.

Furthermore, Nolte is making the curious argument that turning over tax data to the American people is crazy because it would allow an opponent to criticize it. Well, first of all, it would also allow voters to examine it and develop some confidence in the integrity of the candidate. But we wouldn’t want that, would we. Nolte seems to think that the purpose of releasing such information is purely tactical in a political context. He forgets that the real reason is to inform voters so that they can make better decisions.

Secondly, if Nolte is serious, then he is arguing that candidates should never reveal anything about themselves, because any information could be subject to criticism. By the way, Romney is making this same argument.

In another bit of misplaced loyalty, Nolte believes that releasing his tax returns now might make Romney look weak after insisting so fervently that he would not do so. Once again, Nolte is placing Romney’s electoral needs ahead of those of the people. What’s more, nothing makes Romney look weaker than the cowardice he is displaying by refusing to be honest with the voting public.

Finally, Nolte offers some peculiar advice to Romney. He suggests that Romney should agree to release some of his tax returns only after securing concessions from Obama for things that have nothing to do with taxes. For instance, one year of tax returns for documents about Fast and Furious. In other words, he is advocating holding Romney’s taxes hostage for political ransom.

This may be the stupidest part of all. Obama has no incentive whatsoever to comply with such demands. In fact, his incentive would be to laugh in Romney’s face. Here’s why: If Obama refuses to pay Romney’s ransom, then Romney declines to release any more tax data. But the only person that hurts is Romney as he takes more heat for his arrogant reticence to level with the American people. Romney is already getting hammered for not releasing his taxes, so why would Obama be inclined to put an end to that? The best thing Romney could do to trip up Obama would be to get his taxes out and curtail the controversy (unless what’s in the tax returns would cause more damage than that being done by withholding them – which seems likely at this point). Otherwise, Obama looks stronger for standing up to Romney’s ultimatum, and Romney looks shadier for continuing to stonewall.

The question now is – is Romney stupid enough to take advice from Breibrat Nolte?


Fox News Reports: Obama Birth Certificate ‘Definitely Fraudulent’

Posted by on July 18, 2012 at 9:31 am. 10 Comments :

Here we go again, people. If you thought the birther conspiracy was over, or at least confined to the dementia-addled fanatics at WorldNetDaily, you will be sorry to hear that Fox News is continuing to flail this rotting corpse of a long-expired horse.

Fox News Birther Arpaio

The highly non-anticipated investigation by Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff, Joe Arpaio, into President Obama’s place of birth has yielded indisputable new evidence that the birth certificate Obama presented to the media is a forgery. Correction: …indisputable new evidence that Arpaio is a screaming, shit-faced lunatic.

The ground-breaking new information apparently consists of the testimony of a 95 year old former clerk at the Hawaiian registrar’s office who claims to have deciphered secret codes embedded into the certificate. Neither the clerk, nor her allegedly recorded conversation, nor any documentation of the code was revealed at Arpaio’s press conference. However, the Hawaii Attorney General’s Office issued a statement affirming that the certificate is valid. Of course the registrar’s office, the hospital, doctors at the hospital, local newspapers, and family friends, have all said the same thing. Nevertheless, holdouts like Arpaio and Donald Trump continue to have faith in their delusions.

Arpaio may have an ulterior motive in releasing this phantom evidence at this time. Later this week he will be in court defending himself against allegations that his department engaged in rampant racial profiling of Latinos. This is just the latest stain on Arpaio’s record. He is also being investigated by federal authorities for having neglected hundreds of sexual abuse cases while he has been otherwise occupied with his birther obsession.

The fact that this story appears prominently on the Fox News web site, however, is evidence of something significant. It proves how devoted Fox News is to slandering the President and to helping Mitt Romney to change the subject from his business and personal corruption. Even Fox Nation hasn’t posted an article on this (yet). No doubt this non-event will likely pass into the ether in a matter of hours. Arpaio has neither evidence nor credibility. But Fox’s participation in promoting such obvious silliness should not be so quickly dismissed.


Memo To The Romney Campaign: At Long Last Have You No Decency?

Posted by on July 17, 2012 at 4:32 pm. 15 Comments :

The campaign of Mitt Romney is so plainly in panic mode that they are resorting to the most despicable brand of insults imaginable. It is an affirmation of just how desperate they are to evade reasonable questions about Romney’s dubious past.

John Sununu, a top Romney surrogate, has been making the media rounds this week and distinguishing himself as, perhaps, the worst spokesman of all time. And bear in mind that Sununu is not some amateur, Tea Party, political neophyte who is unfamiliar with the media. He is the former governor of New Hampshire and was the Chief of Staff to President George H. W. Bush. So it was no mistake of inexperience that last week he charged, with no evidence whatsoever, that “This is a president who wallowed in Chicago in the murky soup of politics/felons.”

Apparently that baseless smear was not sufficient to rescue Romney from the teetering precipice of his own ineptitude. So today Sununu escalated his unhinged assault by calling President Obama a pot smoking, Indonesian, socialist. No, really…

“[Obama] spent his early years in Hawaii smoking something, spent the next set of years in Indonesia, another set of years in Indonesia, and, frankly, when he came to the U.S. he worked as a community organizer, which is a socialized structure.”

And Sununu wasn’t through. Later he added that “I wish this president would learn how to be an American.”

These are the sort of immature invectives that characterize the ultra-rightist operatives of the John Birch Society, the Tea Party, and the Ku Klux Klan. Yet they are emanating from the severely pursed lips of an establishment Republican speaking on behalf of the GOP nominee for president. It is an abhorrent display of racism and unpatriotic vilification.

Mitt Romney has a lot for which to answer. His latest explanation for the discrepancy in his Bain Capital tenure is that he had “retired retroactively.” His response to those seeking his tax returns is that “Those are the two years people are going to have, and that’s all that’s necessary for people to understand something about my finances.” In his arrogance he believes that he can stonewall the American people and still get their votes.

Another Romney surrogate also spoke out today. John McCain made a statement in response to a flurry of Internet insinuations that he had selected Sarah Palin after having seen 23 years of Romney’s tax returns. McCain shot down that talk and insisted that the real reason was because “we thought that Sarah Palin was the better candidate.” Um, that actually makes it worse, John.

Meanwhile, Romney spent yesterday at fundraisers in Mississippi where he sought to portray the GOP (Greedy One Percent) as the party of the people. At the River Hills Country Club, where he raised $1.7 million dollars at $50,000 per head, Romney said…

“We’re accused of being the party of the rich. And it’s an awful moniker, because that’s just not true. We’re the party of people who want to get rich. And we’re also the party of people who want to care to help people from getting poor. We want to help the poor.”

Indeed. What an awful moniker. And I’m sure the folks who shelled out fifty grand to hear this tripe were just the sort to “care to help people from getting poor.” No doubt they were well aware that Romney’s tax plan would benefit the wealthy far in excess of any relief the middle class would ever see.

Sununu’s virulent attack on Obama is not only repulsive, it is utterly devoid of logic or facts. No Republican has yet been able to explain how Obama could be such a committed commie subversive and still have provided over an economy that has seen corporations achieve record-breaking profits and a stock market that has soared 55 percent. And if it weren’t for obstructionists in Congress, Obama’s jobs initiatives would have produced millions of new jobs. All of this from a president who Republicans say is anti-business and hates Wall Street. Just this afternoon Romney delivered a speech wherein he charged that Obama is “crushing economic freedom” and “wants Americans to be ashamed of success.” Two more delusional, and unsupported allegations that are debunked by reality.

The desperation of the Romney camp is boiling over with these latest shots by Romney and Sununu. While Obama’s team has merely been citing media generated stories about factual inconsistencies in Romney’s resume and his obsessive secrecy. You don’t see the Obama campaign bringing up the fact that Romney is a war mongering draft-dodger. You don’t see them harping on the fact that Romney flipped his position on choice after telling a harrowing tale of a tragic back alley abortion that resulted in his taking a position from which he said he would never waver.

However, you do see the Romney campaign descending to ethical depths from which they may never be able to surface. When a candidate resorts to these sort of tactics before he is even officially the nominee, it is a virtual concession of defeat. He doesn’t believe he can win fairly with a campaign based on substance and a dedication to the issues about which voters are concerned. And when these tactics are employed this early you can only expect things to get worse as election day nears.

The problem for Romney is, how much lower can he go? I suppose that he could still select Allen West as a running mate. Or Ted Nugent. Or maybe Ronald Reagan’s ghost (the first Zombie-American candidate). He could accuse Obama of having been brainwashed by Islamic extremists in his youth and is a walking time-bomb set to go off after his reelection (I think Breitbart and Beck have already visited this nightmare). Or he could tap Palin and reprise the “palling around with terrorists” theme. That was never really played to its full potential.

I better stop there. I don’t want to give the Romney campaign any ideas. In their condition, these might actually sound good.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

The Swiss Boating Of Mitt Romney: A CNN Fable

Posted by on July 17, 2012 at 10:50 am. 9 Comments :

When you hear the right complain, as they always do, about the so-called liberal media, keep in mind the fact that Fox News is the most watched cable news network, that the Wall Street Journal is the largest national newspaper, that talk radio is dominated by conservatives, and that the Internet’s most referenced site belongs to Matt Drudge. What exactly do they think the media is?

Add to that the fact that many establishment news providers bend over backwards to avoid being targeted by conservative critics for having a liberal bias. Or worse, they strive to emulate the right-wing media in hopes of duplicating their perceived success.

CNN is the worst offender in this contest of running to the right. Their aggressive shift in ideology has been well documented. They have hired numerous far-right extremists with no effort to achieve any sort of balance. And that includes the news chief, Ken Jautz. Consequently, their ratings have collapsed along with their journalistic integrity.

Swiss MittThis past weekend CNN broadcast another example of how their sinking ethics have impacted their news judgment. The segment by Tom Foreman was centered on the absurd premise that the Obama campaign has engaged in “Swiftboating” Mitt Romney by accurately questioning his business experience, his millions of dollars in off-shore tax havens, and his refusal to release more than a year or two of his tax returns. Foreman concludes his report saying…

Tom Foreman: In ad after ad, Democrats are suggesting that Romney is a fatcat job outsourcer, an opportunistic financial predator, and an elitist out of touch with the working class. Never mind that many of those claims appear to be backed with little or no evidence. […] Some Republican analysts fear that Mitt Romney could be the second politician from Massachusetts to be Swiftboated out of the presidency.

The problem with Foreman’s conclusion is that there is abundant evidence of the claims made in the Obama ads. And the questions they raise are those that would require answers from any political candidate. Who could deny that Romney is a fatcat? The job outsourcing by Bain entities is not even denied by Romney. He just argues that he wasn’t there at the time (despite official SEC filings that contradict him). And how could someone be more out of touch than by saying that he likes to fire people, he’s not concerned about the poor, and that corporations are people?

Foreman was not alone in raising the specter of Swiftboating on CNN. Reporter Jim Acosta misused the term when he interviewed Mitt Romney on Friday asking him whether he thought he was being Swiftboated. Talk about your softball questions. And media analyst Howard Kurtz also misused the term while promoting his Sunday program Reliable Sources. He was acutely concerned about Romney’s welfare under the intense pressure he must be suffering.

Howard Kurtz: I’ve been increasingly worried about whether the media that have been pushing a lot of these stories, “Boston Globe”, “Washington Post” on outsourcing, “Vanity Fair” on Cayman Island accounts, seem to some people to be echoing the message of the Obama campaign by raising so many questions about Romney’s business background.

Apparently Kurtz is of the opinion that if a story is getting a lot of attention the reporters should immediately stop covering it for fear of overtaxing the beleaguered subject of the story and to avoid charges of bias by “some people” on the receiving end of the bad news. How very considerate of him.

For the record, Swiftboating is a term that describes a campaign to disparage a candidate’s strengths that is based on falsehoods and lacks evidence. It is wholly improper to use the term simply to denounce ads that are critical of a candidate. Criticism that is rooted in the truth, with evidence to back it up, is not Swiftboating in any way shape or form. In fact, refraining from such relevant criticism would be campaign malpractice.

Asking Romney to account for his activities in business, which is the core of his campaign, is fair game. So is asking him to release tax returns as almost every candidate in modern times does – since his own father set the standard back in 1968. But suggesting that news coverage of such issues is Swiftboating, as CNN has done three times in as many days, is proof that the network has lost all interest in being a professional news enterprise.


Running Cover For Mitt Romney: Fox News Comes To The Rescue

Posted by on July 16, 2012 at 5:59 pm. 3 Comments :

So what’s a Republican presidential candidate to do when he’s asked too many questions for which he has no answers (or for which the answers are too damaging)? Run to Fox News, of course.

Mitt Romney has absolutely no coherent response to the criticisms he is fielding on his tenure at Bain Capital. Nor can he answer credibly why he won’t release his tax returns. So he is relying on Fox News to fill the void by diverting attention to anything else in the hopes of changing the subject.

The diversion that Fox appears to have selected on is a snippet of a speech wherein President Obama addressed the collective value of a nation united to advance prosperity for all. The soundbite was edited to include only a small and misleading segment of the speech so as to make Obama look as if he were dismissive of the hard work done by entrepreneurs. The part that Fox has been running in an endless loop says:

“If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

What the President actually said in the full context was:

“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

“The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

“So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for President — because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together.”

That was a pretty explicit endorsement of both personal initiative and community strength. But the memo obviously went out at Fox headquarters advising everyone to get on board this story and distort it beyond all recognition. The theme that was regurgitated throughout the Fox universe was that the President had insulted small business owners. It was broadcast by Fox & Friends, Megyn Kelly, Neil Cavuto, and The Five. It was published on Fox Nation and Fox News online. It was also picked up by Rush Limbaugh and the rest of the Right-Wing Noise Machine. Shortly thereafter the Romney campaign itself picked up the baton and ran with it in an email statement:

“They are also insulting to the hardworking entrepreneurs, small-business owners, and job creators who are the backbone of our economy.”

The only way that anyone could arrive at that conclusion is if they were determined to be dishonest in their representation of the President’s remarks. So it isn’t surprising that Romney’s camp released this statement. They are notorious for their aversion to the truth.

In addition to the “insult” meme, Romney also launched a diversionary attack that accused Obama of funneling public money to his political allies and campaign contributors. Part of this attack was in the form of a web video that mocked Obama’s singing of “Let’s Stay Together.” However, that video has already been removed by YouTube due to copyright violations. This is what Romney told the kiddie crew at Fox & Friends:

“When billions upon billions are given by the Obama administration to the businesses of campaign contributors, that’s a real problem. […] If you’re a campaign contractor to Barack Obama, your business may stand to get billions or hundreds of million in cash from the government. I think it’s wrong – stinks to high heaven and I think the administration has to explain how it is they would consider giving money to campaign contributors’ businesses.”

There are two glaring problems with that critique. First, Romney provided no proof whatsoever – not even an example that had any evidence attached to it. It was a blunt force assault with nothing behind it of substance. And we can expect more of this garbage. Romney has been sending out surrogates like John Sununu to smear Obama for associations with Chicago corruption – also without proof. Secondly, For Romney to complain about Obama padding the pockets of his donors is an odd line of attack because at least Obama reveals who his donors are. Romney has steadfastly refused to identify the bundlers working for his campaign who are responsible for raising the bulk of his funds.

Furthermore, much of the Romney election effort is managed by outside Super PACS, who also withhold donor information. Mitt Romney is running perhaps the most secretive campaign in history. We don’t know who’s bankrolling it. We don’t know what is in his tax returns. We don’t know what role he played at Bain Capital. We don’t know how much cash he had stashed in off-shore bank accounts. Worst, of all, we don’t have any idea what his plans are for resolving the nation’s problems.

Romney operates his campaign like an organized crime syndicate, insisting that everything is above board, but never letting anyone close enough to see where the bodies are buried. Just today a news report revealed that one of Romney’s biggest contributors is under investigation for ties to Chinese mobsters. And Romney has the gall to challenge Obama’s donors?

Romney should immediately disclose who his donors are. Then we can have a discussion. But he is unlikely to do so because it would probably be more damaging to his candidacy than keeping them secret. He’s clearly got something he is intent on hiding. But he is fortunate that he has Fox News to run interference for him and create diversions when necessary.


Mitt Romney: Stop Asking Me So Many Darn Questions For Pete’s Sake

Posted by on July 16, 2012 at 1:22 pm. 1 Comments :

Is Mitt Romney cracking under the pressure? As the election season heats up Romney is finding himself in the crosshairs of both his friends and enemies alike. President Obama thinks the American people are entitled to know what Romney was doing at Bain Capital, and when he was doing it. Conservatives like George Will and Bill Kristol think he needs to release several years of his tax returns, and do it quickly. But Romney doesn’t believe that someone of his status should be called to account for his record.

Ask Mitt Anything

With regard to questions about Bain Capital Romney says that “It’s ridiculous and of course beneath the dignity of the presidency and of his campaign. He really needs to rein in his team and to finally take responsibility for what they’re saying.”

With regard to questions about his tax returns Romney says that “We’re putting out what is required, plus more that’s not required. Those are the two years people are going to have, and that’s all that’s necessary for people to understand something about my finances.”

Damn. He’s only running for president. Why should he be forced to suffer the indignity of defending his qualifications and experience for the job? It’s not as if the President ever had to face embarrassing inquiries into his past. Unless you count Rev. Wright, birth certificates, drug use, palling around with terrorists, and accusations of being both a godless socialist and a secret Muslim.

Republicans once mocked Obama for avoiding encounters with Fox News. They said that he could not face up to Osama Bin Laden if he couldn’t face up to Bill O’Reilly. They might want to check with Bin Laden on how that worked out (or O’Reilly, for that matter). However, the same Republicans never criticize Romney for limiting his media appearances to only Fox News. It wasn’t until the Bain controversy that he scheduled a few very brief interviews with an array of media. And even then his message was that they ought to stop asking him so many questions about things he wants to sweep under the rug.

For a cdandidate who once held town halls where he specifically invited people to “Ask Mitt Anything,” he is sure dead set against giving any answers.


Mitt Romney Goes Back To The Future: Retired #Retroactively

Posted by on July 15, 2012 at 4:24 pm. 4 Comments :

While grasping for justifications to explain his mysterious absence from Bain Capital, Mitt Romney has proven once again that reality surpasses satire.

Mitt Romney - Retired Retroactively

Romney spent Friday afternoon in a peculiar sort of speed-dating ritual with the media, giving five short interviews to five networks all asking the same question: Were you, or were you not, running the company that you said you were running? It apparently was insufficient to quell the controversy because today Romney sent his surrogates around to the Sunday news programs to tell the same story. And what a story it was.

Top campaign adviser Ed Gillespie took the lead. But during his segment with David Gregory of Meet the Press, Gillespie may have helped to erase the memory of the Etch-a-Sketch debacle launched by another Romney adviser a few weeks ago:

GREGORY: He was still financially linked to Bain. And of course, a lot his fortune is due to his time with Bain. Even when he was on leave, does he stand by the business decisions that were made by the firm he created?

That’s actually a good question. While much of the press has been focused on whether or not Romney maintained an active role at Bain from 1999 to 2002, the years when many controversial activities resulted in shuttered factories and jobs exported overseas, no one has yet asked whether Romney approved of the decisions that were made by the people he says he left behind to run his business. But Gillespie dodged the question and instead dropped this nugget that will very likely make him famous:

GILLESPIE: He actually retired retroactively at that point. He ended up not going back to the firm after his time in Salt Lake City. So he was actually retired from Bain.

Retired retroactively? You can do that? Needless to say, that tortured phraseology quickly became a trending topic on Twitter. A couple of my own contributions:

And lest anyone think that Gillespie misspoke, he repeated almost verbatim the same excuse when he appeared on CNN’s State of the Nation with Candy Crowley:

GILLESPIE: He took a leave of absence and in fact, Candy, ended up not going back at all and retired retroactively to February 1999 as a result.

So there you have it. Despite all of the evidence that Romney was still in charge of Bain while he was supposedly working at the Olympics, he was actually retired. It’s just that neither he, nor anyone else, knew it at the time.

We still haven’t got an answer as to whether he approved of the direction Bain had taken in his “absence,” but he is sure running away from it as though there were something about it for which he would be sorely ashamed. We also don’t know whether he retroactively reimbursed Bain for the hundreds of thousands of dollars he collected in salary during the time he was retroactively retired.

I sure wish I could not show up for work for three years, collect a hefty paycheck the whole time, then tell them I decided not to come back. But I guess that’s the difference between people like Romney and the rest of us. The privileged classes get to make up their own rules, and when those don’t suffice, they just make up new ones. Sweet!