Romney stands by message in secret video

[tarboy]

Yah…whatever. Foodstamps are a gift of other people’s money via the government to those less fortunate. The people who receive foodstamps did nothing to earn them and have no legal claim against the government if they don’t receive that “money”, unlike someone who actually has something taken from them.

Well, they are called ‘entitlements’ because people do believe they are owed the money.

It’s one big soup kitchen that doesn’t teach anyone how to fish, and feed themselves.

 

[CMatt25]

Most Americans pay more than the 14% Romney paid when his income was $20 million. The fact that he is too ashamed to release his own tax returns says a lot. I have come to think of the Republican party as the party of shame. A presidential candidate too embarrassed by his own behavior to be forthright. A party too ashamed of the behavior of its last president to allow him to attend the convention. Pathetic.

I did hear though Ryan had to release 10 yrs. But maybe Mitt in paying such a low rate for a $20 million income is striving for the 47%.

 

[ishii]

Ringil, I hear ya but don’t be so sure. Reagan, Reagan, Bush I. Clinton, Clinton, and Gore did win the popular vote of Americans. And if Obama is reelected and the economy improves over the next 4 yrs, a Democrat would have a chance in 16.

Look at the elections from 1976 - Carter wins as a southerner and outsider (he was known as a born-again Christian and was considered somewhat “conservative”. Then Reagan’s two terms, then Bush 1. Bush probably would have been re-elected had it not been for Ross Perot - and the Dems had to nominate a centrist to even have much of a chance. Then Clinton runs for election by swinging to the right. Bush loses popular vote of course. The October surprise (DWI conviction) did hiim in and prevented him from winning the popular vote. Then Bush gets re-elected. Empty chair/suit Obama rides to the white house based on not incumbent party fatigue, his race, and the economy, plus inept McCain campaign. In short - we’ve had a basically conservative or center-right country over the past few decades. This could change by 2016 if Obama does get re-elected as more and more people will be on the dole, getting aid from the federal govt. and have an even greater stake in keeping the party in power that signs the checks. So, Cmatt, you might get your wish of liberal/socialist Democrat electoral dominance. But it won’t be USA anymore, it will be the UWSO.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

Broader than the listeners and viewers of Rush and FOX News and broader than the opinion of many of the conservatives on places such as CAF. It’s a big world out there beyond.

You mean mainstream media that is in the tank for Obama and will protect him by dissecting, scrutinizing, and otherwise diverting attention away from the failures of Obama which are piling up? What you are referring to Cmatt is not a broad world but a very narrow elitist world that doesn’t trust people to make up their own minds.

Ishii

 

[ringil]

Indeed. Those employees probably don’t even need an owner. They built his business for him!

Well, he couldn’t have built it without them.

 

[migueltojose]

Broader than the listeners and viewers of Rush and FOX News and broader than the opinion of many of the conservatives on places such as CAF. It’s a big world out there beyond.

CNN and NYT better… no… they stink… I struggle to wath or read any of them. PBS may be the best but that’s because the competition stinks. C-SPAN at least is mostly just a raw feed.

What we have here is failure to communicate… we have the opposite of what we had during the war for independence… then the battle cry was taxation without representation… now we have representation with out taxation… the net result is… well… it’s like the government is literally buying votes… with taxpayers money (who are the ones that mostly vote against them)… crazy… not to say that income distribution is not a problem… it is…

Uncertaintly leads to fear, fear leads to greed (I need more more more because the future of the world is so uncertain) greed leads to selfishness. How can we break this, eliminate the uncertainty, how can we do that… well… I don’t know but a good start is with Faith Hope and Love. And their secular cousins: confidence, motivation and passion. Now how do we restore that… education, evangelization and enlightenment… It’s going to be hard but politics is not the answer. They have one job and that is to get elected and then re-elected and that is all about money and compromise. Not the answer.

 

[migueltojose]

Uncertaintly leads to fear, fear leads to greed (I need more more more because the future of the world is so uncertain) greed leads to selfishness. How can we break this, eliminate the uncertainty, how can we do that… well… I don’t know but a good start is with Faith Hope and Love. And their secular cousins: confidence, motivation and passion. Now how do we restore that… education, evangelization and enlightenment… It’s going to be hard but politics is not the answer. They have one job and that is to get elected and then re-elected and that is all about money and compromise. Not the answer.

Not to suggest that our civic duty to vote is not important it. It is vital. That is our opportunity to enact positive change. We have the greatest governmental structure ever devised by man. We must use it (and protect it from abuse). We must vote and vote right… far right… because: 1 - life issues and 2: supreme court justices.

Catholics have traditionally been democrats primarily due to “social justice” issues. Ironically, that is what should now steer us to the right, the so called non-negotiables. However, if when the democrats come around, we will be right there with them. I am fiscally conservative (how can we not be given our 16 trillion dollar debt) and socially libertarian and personally/morally Catholic. We can complain about election results but they reflect the voters. We need to affect the voters and not whine about the results. We are a minority. Now we are learning what it feels like.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Actually I have a post of yours saved from about a week ago stating that Romney will win and “win big”.

I’ll be here and when I paste your post it will be all “slaughter, dismemberment, murder, sin, sorrow, weeping”, these will be the terms.

Anything to not eat the humble pie.

You see I CAN eat the humble pie if Obama looses, but can you if Mittins does???

I guess we will see. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

So you would gloat to the people whose messages you have saved that said Romney would win?

You should not gloat over your brother in the day of his misfortune, nor rejoice over the people of Judah in the day of their destruction, nor boast so much in the day of their trouble - Obadiah 1:12

 

[Seeker1961]

They didn’t build anything themselves. Besides various government aid or loans some may have received along their way, they received an education. No doubt some of them a public education. And they need consumers, clients, customers, patrons or they would have no business. Those consumers in cases need roads and bridges to get to the businesses. And many of those consumers received a public education or other government help in order to get to their station in life where they are able to consume. Without which the owners have no business.

the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. ended up footing a bill of at least $10 million in bailing out Bain & Co., the consulting firm that spawned the private-equity firm Bain Capital. The story is based partly on documents received under the Freedom of Information Act.

The public-private agreements, which began in the first decade of Romney’s tenure as CEO, show that government played a supporting role in establishing Bain as among the nation’s most successful private equity firms and enabling him to accumulate a fortune his campaign says could reach $250 million.

From HuffPo and other non-conservative websites-feel free to dismiss, but it’s still out there for others to find.

Guess he didn’t build that all by himself after all…

 

[_Abyssinia]

Critical audio gap in “complete” Romney tape released by Mother Jones (Update – Corn responds, 1-2 minutes missing)

legalinsurrection.com/2012/09/critical-audio-gap-in-complete-romney-tape-released-by-mother-jones

_

CNBC And Yahoo Finance Readers really liked Mitt Romney’s Comments

businessinsider.com/cnbc-and-yahoo-finance-readers-really-liked-mitt-romneys-comments-2012-9

_

Ann Romney: I know Mitt and he definitely wasn’t showing disdain for the poor

therightscoop.com/ann-romney-i-know-mitt-and-he-definitely-wasnt-showing-disdain-for-the-poor

_

If the tape doesn’t knock Romney out, the media narrative is toast

legalinsurrection.com/2012/09/if-the-tape-doesnt-knock-romney-out-the-media-narrative-is-toast

_

Santelli On Romney Tape: “We Have A Dependency Society,” The “Media Overblows Everything”

realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/09/18/santelli_on_romney_tape_we_have_a_dependency_society_the_media_overblows_everything.html

_

Romney’s Declared Doomed Once a Week, But the Voters Haven’t Noticed

nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/327810/romneys-declared-doomed-once-week-voters-havent-noticed

_

Voters, like Romney, want smaller government

washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/voters-like-romney-want-smaller-government/2012/09/18/09959b6e-01a9-11e2-b257-e1c2b3548a4a_blog.html

 

[SwizzleStick]

My only caution is to make very sure you know exactly who those “moochers” actually are before you condemn them. But, I guess it doesn’t matter as long as you get to keep all of your money, right?

Wow. Just wow.

 

[Seeker1961]

President Barack Obama leads Republican challenger Mitt Romney nationally among likely voters, 50 percent to 45 percent, according to a poll released Tuesday night by NBC News and the Wall Street Journal.

Of course, those are not conservative sources…

and there is still a LOT of time to go before November.

 

[scipio337]

From HuffPo and other non-conservative websites-feel free to dismiss, but it’s still out there for others to find.

Guess he didn’t build that all by himself after all…

All based on a *Rolling Stone *article that is heavy on the editorial side (surprise!!).

Other analysis:

Essentially, here’s what happened at Bain & Company in the early nineties. As a consulting firm that relied on corporations having enough money to hire them for important and lucrative projects, Bain was hurt badly by the stock market crash of 1987. In addition, there were some scandals at the company, and a heavy debt load that became harder to service as business dried up.

Romney, who was running Bain Capital at the time, was called back home to Bain & Company to play Mr. Fix-It and get the company out of debt. So he restructured Bain’s debt, and renegotiated contracts with its creditors. One of those contracts was an IOU for roughly $30 million, which Bain owed to a failing bank that had been taken over by a government agency known as the FDIC.

In renegotiating Bain’s agreement with the FDIC, it appears that Romney played hardball, threatening to pay out millions of dollars in Bain’s cash to executives in the form of bonuses to top firm executives unless the FDIC agreed to forgive the firm’s debt.

If you’re Dickinson, this looks like “a perverse form of leverage” employed by Romney that, in the end, led to Bain getting a cozy bailout that “wound up being paid by the American people.”

Here’s the sticky point: Bain’s debt negotiation was nothing like the taxpayer-funded Wall Street bailouts of 2008 and 2009. In fact, it wasn’t funded by taxpayers at all.

It’s confusing, because the FDIC is a government agency. And government agencies tend to be funded by taxpayers. But the FDIC is a special case. Essentially, it’s a bank guarantor that is funded by the banks it guarantees. Every year, banks write a proverbial check to the FDIC for the equivalent of life insurance, and in return, the FDIC promises to backstop them if they’re ever about to go out of business. The agency gets no funding — as in, zero dollars — from the government’s coffers.

So while Romney’s deal may have been unseemly (Dickinson points out that the FDIC chairman at the time was an adviser to George Romney during his 1968 run for president), it didn’t screw taxpayers, at least directly.

Dickinson is smart enough to know this, which is why he gives the hair-splitting proviso that “while taxpayers did not finance the bailout, the debt forgiven by the government was booked as a loss to the FDIC – and then recouped through higher insurance premiums from banks. And banks, of course, are notorious for finding ways to pass their costs along to customers, usually in the form of higher fees.”

That could be true, but it’s a bit of a stretch.

If you’re going to claim in your headline that Bain & Company got a “Federal Bailout” (or, claim that, as Gawker’s headline originally read, before they changed it and issued a clarification, that Romney “Looted a Dying Company for Executive Bonuses While [Bain] Owed Taxpayers Millions”), you’d better have proof that taxpayers were, in fact, on the hook.

nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/08/did-mitt-romney-get-bailed-out-at-bain.html

It wasn’t a “bailout” by any stretch of the imagination. Romney re-negotiated a debt owed to a bank that failed, and was taken over by the FDIC.

PoHuff/Rolling Stone FAIL.

 

[LisaA]

They didn’t build anything themselves. Besides various government aid or loans some may have received along their way, they received an education. No doubt some of them a public education. And they need consumers, clients, customers, patrons or they would have no business. Those consumers in cases need roads and bridges to get to the businesses. And many of those consumers received a public education or other government help in order to get to their station in life where they are able to consume. Without which the owners have no business.

It fascinates me that anyone believes this silly argument. “You didn’t build that” because there are public roads and schools and bridges? Are you kidding me?

Here’s the hole in this stupid and naive theory. EVERYONE ELSE HAD ACCESS TO THOSE VERY SAME ROADS AND BRIDGES…but they DIDN"T all build businesses. That’s what America is about, the opportunity to use your God given gifts (well unless you are a Democrat and there is no God involved) to make something of yourself and support your family, be a productive member of society and hopefully feel gratitude to God and your fellow man so as to give back.

But to claim that because a kid rode a public school bus to a public school on a public road, the public is credited when he graduates Cum Laude from Harvard or founds Apple is just plain nuts.

Lisa

 

[Tampa_Dave]

Ringil, I hear ya but don’t be so sure. Reagan, Reagan, Bush I. Clinton, Clinton, and Gore did win the popular vote of Americans. And if Obama is reelected and the economy improves over the next 4 yrs, a Democrat would have a chance in 16.

 

[LisaA]

All based on a *Rolling Stone *article that is heavy on the editorial side (surprise!!).

Other analysis:

nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/08/did-mitt-romney-get-bailed-out-at-bain.html

It wasn’t a “bailout” by any stretch of the imagination. Romney re-negotiated a debt owed to a bank that failed, and was taken over by the FDIC.

PoHuff/Rolling Stone FAIL.

The devil is in the details! But if you’re HuffPo or Rolling Stone the facts really don’t matter if you can obfuscate, infer or outright make things up.

Love this WSJ Editorial about the MSM’s drooling obsession with Obama:

online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443995604578002523312508286.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Journalism as I remember it in the days of Woodward and Bernstein chasing “Deep Throat” died long ago. Now what we have are one step above those who write for OK or People Magazine…well maybe a half step.

Lisa

 

[Tampa_Dave]

The devil is in the details! But if you’re HuffPo or Rolling Stone the facts really don’t matter if you can obfuscate, infer or outright make things up.

Love this WSJ Editorial about the MSM’s drooling obsession with Obama:

online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443995604578002523312508286.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Journalism as I remember it in the days of Woodward and Bernstein chasing “Deep Throat” died long ago. Now what we have are one step above those who write for OK or People Magazine…well maybe a half step.

Lisa

The MSM is openly pro-Obama. But the American public doesn’t seem to mind.

 

[scipio337]

It fascinates me that anyone believes this silly argument. “You didn’t build that” because there are public roads and schools and bridges? Are you kidding me?

Here’s the hole in this stupid and naive theory. EVERYONE ELSE HAD ACCESS TO THOSE VERY SAME ROADS AND BRIDGES…but they DIDN"T all build businesses. That’s what America is about, the opportunity to use your God given gifts (well unless you are a Democrat and there is no God involved) to make something of yourself and support your family, be a productive member of society and hopefully feel gratitude to God and your fellow man so as to give back.

But to claim that because a kid rode a public school bus to a public school on a public road, the public is credited when he graduates Cum Laude from Harvard or founds Apple is just plain nuts.

Lisa

+1.

In mathmatic terms, roads, bridges, schools are a constant. Ambition, hard work and vision are variables.

You DID build that!

The Romney quote won’t last a week. “You didn’t build that!” is forever.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

That’s what America is about, the opportunity to use your God given gifts (well unless you are a Democrat and there is no God involved)

:tiphat: Thank you for that, Lisa.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

The MSM is openly pro-Obama. But the American public doesn’t seem to mind.

Why should they? Are we to have a Political Correctness Police ordering that equal coverage be given to each candidate? Rush Limbaugh, e.g., is openly pro-Romney, and the American public doesn’t mind that, either.