|
Post by duke on Jul 12, 2012 15:09:26 GMT -5
Speaking of Mitt's outsourcing, Vanity Fair published a deep-dive investigation this month into Mitt's offshore finances. The author, Nicholas Shaxson, finds that while "the assertion that he broke no laws is widely accepted," the truth, "in fact, isn't straightforward." How much, if at all, will this piece damage Romney? The Associated Press has also been on this case, and others will surely follow. Like the non-disclosure of his tax returns, Mitt's opaque foreign investments and bank accounts make you wonder what he is hiding, not just about money but other aspects of his life and career, including his yet-to-be-detailed years as a lay official of his church. Voters like to feel they know the person they are voting for, and every Mitt secret on any subject plays into the trope of Mitt the Mystery Man. And, as with his tax returns, Romney doesn't have a good answer to the questions raised about his offshore holdings. Speaking of his investments a few days ago, he came up with this: 'I don't manage them. I don't even know where they are.' Which prompted Romney's persistent critic David Letterman to counter: 'He does not manage his own finances and he doesn't know where his money is — This is the guy to fix the economy!'readersupportednews.org/off-site-opinion-section/72-72/12377-focus-romney-has-a-tax-and-koch-problem
|
|
|
Post by wheels on Jul 12, 2012 16:30:40 GMT -5
the fact that the left is trying to paint romney as some mystery man is laughable when you compare him to obama.
i wonder why the MSM isn't looking into the international financial dealings of democrats.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jul 12, 2012 17:04:28 GMT -5
That is politics. The post is indirectly from Vanity Fair, not MSNBC. MSNBC partial to Obama. Seems that way. That offsets Fox and CNN for Romney?
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on Jul 13, 2012 8:43:15 GMT -5
It's just another red herring designed to ensnare the financially illiterate.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jul 13, 2012 14:04:00 GMT -5
So who is Romney considering to run the US financial business? Will it be outsourced to India or China, or if the price is right maybe N Korea? LOL
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on Jul 13, 2012 14:12:21 GMT -5
It seems like you're the target audience of this piece.
He could outsource the US economy to the Marx brothers and do better than Obama.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jul 13, 2012 15:01:59 GMT -5
As I recall, GW Bush took two terms to run this government from a surplus to a deficit and oversaw the giant collapse in 2008 where billions were appropriated to bail out the likes of AIG.
Indeed it could take more than 4 years to recover.
|
|
|
Post by elgusano on Jul 14, 2012 10:59:21 GMT -5
If doubling the damages is your idea of a "recovery", we can't afford to recover any further.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jul 14, 2012 17:05:45 GMT -5
We could not afford G.W. Bush either, but he got elected. Because Bush had a second term, We now have Sam Alito and John Roberts as Supreme court justices. Aren't you proud?
As I recall, Roosevelt presided over one of the deepest depressions in American History and it took more than 4 years to recover.
If Mittens gets the hot seat and sends more jobs overseas, as has been his MO, this country indeed may not recover.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on Jul 16, 2012 15:16:57 GMT -5
To date, your tribe hasn't presented a single example of this. If you want to start making stuff up we can start talking about the Kenyan Muslim cokehead on the D ticket.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jul 16, 2012 15:54:02 GMT -5
To date, your tribe hasn't presented a single example of this. If you want to start making stuff up we can start talking about the Kenyan Muslim cokehead on the D ticket. Fair challenge: Here is backing. Politifact: Mitt Romney’s companies sent jobs overseas Posted at 12:09 By Greg Sargent “Mitt Romney’s companies sent jobs overseas.†Is that statement true or false? It passed mostly unnoticed, but on Friday, a well-respected fact-checking organization â€' one cited by the Romney campaign itself on occasion â€' essentially agreed that this is a defensible assertion. In its Friday piece, www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jul/13/barack-obama/were-romneys-companies-pioneers-outsourcing/ Politifact gave a “half true†rating to the following Obama campaign claim: “Mitt Romney’s companies were pioneers in outsourcing U.S. jobs to low-wage countries.†But if you dig deep into the piece, you find that the main reason for the “half†true rating was the Obama camp’s claim that Romney’s companies “pioneered†this practice. Politifact disagreed with that. But Politifact agreed that it’s fair game to describe these as “Romney’s companies.†For example, in 2000, a Bain-controlled firm, Modus Media, closed a plant in California and opened one in Mexico. The Romney camp, of course, has argued that jobs were moved overseas after Romney left the firm. The Obama campaign has argued that documents show Romney was still CEO and chairman, and should be held responsible for the company’s activities at the time. But Politifact notes that the distinction is beside the point: [t]he exact month that Romney stepped away from Bain makes little difference. When Modus Media closed that plant in California in 2000, it was making the kind of move Romney and Bain expected when they first got behind it. The particular decision was not known, but the general nature of the decision was, the experts we spoke with said. Matthew Rice, Chief Investment Officer for DiMeo Schneider and Associates, a Chicago-based investment consulting firm, says he doesn’t see how Romney can divorce himself from the strategies that made Bain profitable. “Technically, I guess he can,†Rice said. “But they would have done it anyway, whether he was there or not. If you can offshore and cut costs, you do it.â€... We find reasonable grounds for labeling the companies as “Romney’s.†He was the founder of Bain and assembled a team that looked to make high returns. One strategy was to invest in companies that played off the trend in outsourcing. If picking a company makes it yours, then these were Romney’s companies and in a general sense, they did what he expected them to do. The one caveat is there is a gray area of direct accountability, because no one has reported that he was personally involved in managing those firms. Politifact is acknowledging that “direct accountability†is hard to confirm, but that to some degree it’s meaningless, given the larger context. Relatedly, on MSNBC this morning, HuffPo’s Sam Stein made a good point, noting that Romney has not said whether he personally views the controversial deals as representing a problematic business practice. “Does the Governor think that those were good deals for Bain?†Stein asked. It’s a good question. This is what I was getting at on Friday, when I wrote that the question of whether Romney himself personally approved the deals in question is an overly narrow way of framing the debate. In a way this gets at one of the ways that fact checking is an inexact science that depends heavily on what statement is actually being fact checked. The argument needn’t be only focused on whether Romney personally signed off on each controversial deal. The larger point here is that Romney’s business background was about creating wealth â€' regardless of the impact it had on American jobs â€' and that in so doing, his company invested in firms that outsourced and ultimately moved jobs overseas, even as Romney remained listed as CEO and sole shareholder. I rate that last statement to be “true.†www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/politifact-mitt-romneys-companies-sent-jobs-overseas/2012/07/16/gJQAuttmoW_blog.htmlYour turn.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on Jul 16, 2012 19:13:03 GMT -5
Dude, unlike you, I have a job plus two little kids at home and I simply do not have the time to engage in a dissertation on every stupid "point" that you try to make. I will, however, point out this.
Your argument comes from a wapo blog. Opinion is not fact. If the fact existed, your boy would be on every channel all day screaming about it as would his lapdogs on cnnmsnbc. If I get the time, I'll read some of your post but I doubt I'm gonna have that kind of time.
You people are grasping at ever thinner straws in a vane attempt to prevent yourselves from making Walter Mondale feel better about his comparatively gentle defeat.
|
|
|
Post by Smilin' Jack on Jul 16, 2012 19:33:35 GMT -5
It's a Progressive tactic to waste your time in inane pointless arguments because it distracts you from more effective efforts to defeat them.
And don't forget about Mrs. Fredo.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jul 17, 2012 15:11:24 GMT -5
It's a Progressive tactic to waste your time in inane pointless arguments because it distracts you from more effective efforts to defeat them. And don't forget about Mrs. Fredo. An fredo and you will not accept any proof offered. Your demands to supply proof is nothing but a gimmick to waste someone else's time. Fortunately it only took 90 seconds to supply. Neither of you will accept any proof that may contradicts your preconceived bigotry. Neither of you would post anything that is against your favorite candidate. I have. Prove the claims above are in error. You cannot.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on Jul 17, 2012 15:57:46 GMT -5
So you admit that you didn't read it either. nice.
I can google up someone else's opinion and post it without reading it first but I thought we were attempting to work with facts here.
Also, if you can't clean all that crap out of your posts, kindly don't post.I can google up stupid crap and read it without all the extra characters if that's how I choose to spend my limited free time.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jul 17, 2012 16:49:39 GMT -5
So I do not read as slowly as you do. The facts are there and quoted from a source that that Romney operatives also have cited. You have your head in the sand, simply because the headline disagees with your desired outcome. Your posts are getting more ridiculous and nonsensical each passing day. Another Gary Poole that simply asserts garbage than whines and threatens posters if he is proven wrong. Grow up. The whole world does not have to believe exactly the way you do. There are others that may like to read something other that Rush Limbaugh hate filed quotes.
Everyone does not have the same option you apparently have. While I am glad you have those options, You and Romney do not have to constantly denigrate the less fortunate.
|
|
|
Post by wheels on Jul 17, 2012 17:04:37 GMT -5
It's a Progressive tactic to waste your time in inane pointless arguments because it distracts you from more effective efforts to defeat them. And don't forget about Mrs. Fredo. An fredo and you will not accept any proof offered. Your demands to supply proof is nothing but a gimmick to waste someone else's time. Fortunately it only took 90 seconds to supply. Neither of you will accept any proof that may contradicts your preconceived bigotry. Neither of you would post anything that is against your favorite candidate. I have. Prove the claims above are in error. You cannot. proof? even your own source says that there is not proof that romney was personally involved in the managing the firms.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on Jul 17, 2012 19:10:54 GMT -5
So I do not read as slowly as you do. The facts are there and quoted from a source that that Romney operatives also have cited. You have your head in the sand, simply because the headline disagees with your desired outcome. Your posts are getting more ridiculous and nonsensical each passing day. Another Gary Poole that simply asserts garbage than whines and threatens posters if he is proven wrong. Grow up. The whole world does not have to believe exactly the way you do. There are others that may like to read something other that Rush Limbaugh hate filed quotes. Everyone does not have the same option you apparently have. While I am glad you have those options, You and Romney do not have to constantly denigrate the less fortunate. Ah that's the stuff. It's been ages since I've been called a "Gary Poole". Doesn't it sting that a sad little man such as yourself has to content himself by shouting into the wind that I provide?
|
|
|
Post by Smilin' Jack on Jul 18, 2012 17:06:29 GMT -5
"Bridge to Environmental Control Room.
This is the Captain speaking, cut the air supply (wind) to the Progressive compartments now!"
|
|
|
Post by Smilin' Jack on Jul 18, 2012 19:34:53 GMT -5
The proof is that the market system is the best system ever devised and proven in practice, to manage the dynamic process of creative destruction (change) that rapid innovation produces.
And the US for over a century, has been the most innovative on the planet. Entirely new industries have been created and the old that the new replaced, went away. Their resources re-directed to other productive uses.
I accept that.
The economically illiterate and the stupid among us, don't.
They instead focus on the 'common good' and other collectivist claptrap, fairness, equitable redistribution of wealth, attacking those that create that change, that are successful at creating products and services that millions of people want.
Luddites.
And stupid is the only word that explains the number of smelly OWS hippies sporting iphones, ipods, and ipads while they spew anti-business slogans.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Jul 22, 2012 11:24:56 GMT -5
Jack: OWS knew that Wall street was stealing from the public. Proof is finally being printed and a few low level traders have gone to jail. Yet the CEO's of these fraudulent enterprises are, with one exception, Barclays, still drawing their multi-million dollar salaries without prosecution. Yes a few banks have agreed to pay a few days earnings in penalties that can be written off as a cost of business expense, but the controllers of those criminal enterprises are not feeling any pain.
|
|