“…Thus the financial manipulator who decimated jobs in the private sector was a governor whose policies left his state 47th in job creation. The takeover artist who slashed health benefits for workers would end Medicare as we know it, subject seniors to the harsh mercies of insurance companies, and raise their costs by approximately $6,500 a year….”
Why can’t Mitt Romney’s Bain years be scrutinized the way we would vet those who are not as perfect as the New Chosen One? Is this about honest defense of Mitt Romney, or about politicians bought and paid for – by the financial sector, defending Romney? Cory Booker is one of those prostitutes, having received nearly a half million bucks having been donated to him by the financial industry. Several other major Dems don’t approve of Romney’s Bain record being attacked.
There are several reasons:
“…More likely, Romney will trot out workers — say, from Staples — to highlight jobs he claims to have created. The problem here is that during his tenure, Bain had two businesses. One was venture capital investing in start-ups. The other, which Romney drove, consisted of buying out a firm, hollowing it out, loading it up with debt, cutting wages — and making millions before the firm went belly-up. The one endeavor doesn’t redeem the other: What’s at issue here is not an accounting question, some mere matter of addition and subtraction, but the crass calculation of pillaging jobs and oppressing workers as a conscious business plan while occasionally grabbing a government bailout along the way.
Moreover, the response irresistibly invites a challenge: Romney should release the records of all Bain transactions from which he profited. He probably can’t afford to because the picture could be pretty grim. Presumably, he’s about as likely to risk this kind of full disclosure as he is to release tax returns for years when he may have paid little or no taxes….”
Is it possible that the internals in the Romney campaign say the attack is working? When Romney’s very own Tokyo Rose starts going after his attackers, it could be he’s in trouble.
Steven Rattner, a former Obama operative stated what those of us opposed to Romney have been saying for months when it comes to Romney’s tall tales about job creation.
“...However, I was also concerned that the Obama ads, while narrowly accurate, might be seen to portray Bain Capital (and implicitly, private equity) in an ugly light because a few of the companies the firm invested in went bankrupt while Bain Capital still made money
On Monday, Mr. Obama struck the right balance, emphasizing that he wasn’t attacking private equity but was questioning Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital credentials to be the job creator in chief.
That’s fair, particularly because Mr. Romney himself has been foolishly reweaving history to claim, as recently as last week, that he helped create 100,000 jobs during his time at Bain.
In fact, Bain Capital — like other private equity firms — was founded and managed for profit: ideally, huge amounts of gain earned legally and legitimately. Any job creation was a welcome but secondary byproduct.
The language in one prospectus seeking Bain Capital investors was clear: “The objective of the Fund is to achieve an annual rate of return on invested capital in excess of the returns generated” by other investments. Any job creation was accidental.
In Mr. Romney’s case, his jobs assertion rests heavily on just a few early investments.
Originally hatched to provide venture capital to young enterprises, Bain Capital notched a few such successes, notably Staples and Sports Authority. These were small stakes in companies — about $2.5 million in Staples — over which Bain had little influence.
While I defend the role financiers play in making our economy work, I also concede that Mark Zuckerberg was far more central to the success of Facebook and its 3,200 jobs than the venture capitalists who invested early.
Although Bain Capital sold off those early investments years ago, Mr. Romney takes credit for every job ever created at every company Bain Capital invested in during his tenure — while ignoring jobs eliminated after his departure.
“The steel factory closed down two years after I left Bain Capital,” he said last week about GST Steel, the Kansas City, Mo., company that went bankrupt in 2001. “I was no longer there, so that’s hardly something which is on my watch.”
Meanwhile, when Staples went public in 1989, it had 1,100 employees; at the end of 1998, right before Mr. Romney exited Bain, it had 42,000 workers. Yet Mr. Romney takes credit for the 89,000 employed at the close of 2010….”
Is it possible the real reason Mitt’s Bain record cannot be touches is because Mitt doesn’t have as much money as Obama – to defend himself?
“…With the new buy, the commercial went up again Tuesday and will run through Friday in several Ohio and West Virginia markets: Youngstown, Toledo, Charleston-Huntington and Wheeling. Team Obama hopes it can build support in key blue collar areas of Ohio as it pushes a message of economic fairness and paints Romney as a cruel job killer through the paid media campaign, an extended online video and through the free media the campaign has been able to attract through its emphasis in the last week and a half on the issue. The campaign also has staged events in several states showcasing cases where Bain bought companies which later bankrupt.
How much the Obama team is spending on the anti-Bain ad pales in comparison to the kickoff general election ad campaign which began May 9th. The campaign said initially invested about $23 million in eight battleground states for ads to run through June 3rd, according to ad tracking data. This week it invested an additional $2.3 million for more 30 second and one minute ads in the same states: Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia – considered by most analysts to be the key battleground states. The additional buys begin Wednesday and continue through June 3rd. The campaign has been rotating ads touting with the administration’s economic record and its initiatives to promote higher education.
In the last month, Ohio, Virginia, New Hampshire, Florida and North Carolina have seen visits by President Obama and/or Vice President Joe Biden. Mr. Obama will be making stops in Colorado on Wednesday and Thursday in Iowa.
While the Romney campaign will be heavily outspent on the ad front buying about $2.5 million worth of commercials in the last two weeks, it is getting key support: the Republican- aligned advocacy group Crossroads GPS is in the midst of what it describes as a $25 million ad campaign in battleground states airing a series of ads which attacks President Obama’s record…”
Mitt Romney has a glass jaw. He can’t respond to attacks because he has no defense against them. If he thinks things are bad now, just wait until after Labor Day. If he keeps up his current behavior, he will go down as one of the biggest cry babies in political history.
Robert Shrum shows us why Romney may be looking good now, but is going to take the GOP down in flames in November.
Then there were his years as Governor of Massachusetts.
“…“He doesn’t talk about his time as governor because it doesn’t tell the story he is selling,” Patrick said. “We were 47th in job creation. … I don’t think he’s a bad guy, and he’s always been good to me, … but the whole host of reforms folks have talked about for decades — he didn’t get ’em done, we got ’em done.“Mr. Fix It didn’t fix it.”
While Bain is the focus now, Democrats say they are likely to bring up Massachusetts more and more as the campaign rolls on, focusing on the state’s anemic job growth during Romney’s term, led by a big decline in industrial employment, an increase in the state’s long-term debt load under his stewardship and a $750 million increase in taxes and fees on state residents, revenue enhancements that prompted the conservative Cato Institute in 2006 to label Romney’s no-tax hikes pledge “mostly a myth.”…”
And – that is why The Pink Flamingo will not be voting for Mitt Romney in November. If we base his potential as POTUS on his record as governor, he will increase government spending and increase taxes. I thought that’s why the GOP wanted to get rid of Obama.
Golly, maybe well – maybe they just like Romney’s hair, his perfect family, and his perfect life. I swear there are some conservative pundits who have a man-crush on him. It’s the only logical explanation for their suicidal support of him.