I’ve been laid off three times before. I’m lucky in that sense to have not been married, not have kids, not have a mortgage and to have been young and healthy each time. I was grateful that decision makers looked me in the eye every time and told me themselves. Most people aren’t afforded those courtesies. Each time Bain took over a company and it failed, do you think Mitt Romney looked a bunch of workers in the eye and said: I wish this could have worked out better? Sure he didn’t. It wasn’t his job to.
*** Bain gets more scrutiny: After the Washington Post reported on Friday that Bain Capital, under Mitt Romney’s leadership, invested in firms that outsourced jobs to China and India, other news organizations piled on Bain. Over the weekend, the New York Times wrote that even when Bain-controlled companies filed for bankruptcy and shed jobs, Bain and its executives still made money. “Bain structured deals so that it was difficult for the firm and its executives to ever really lose, even if practically everyone else involved with the company that Bain owned did, including its employees, creditors and even, at times, investors in Bain’s funds.” Also, the Boston Globe noted how Romney and Bain once partnered with famed junk-bond king Michael Milken in a leveraged buyout. “It showed how he pivoted from being a relatively cautious investor to risking his reputation for a big payoff. It is one that Romney has rarely, if ever, mentioned in his two bids for the presidency, perhaps because the Houston-based department store chain that Bain assembled later went into bankruptcy.”
Bain swept in, told them they were make things better and required their sacrifice in return: benefits, pay and health care cost increases. These people were willing to work. These people worked hard. Their companies made money. And then some guys they never heard of before in their life turn it upside and down, borrow a bunch of cash against the company that provides their livelihoods and walk away leaving the companies awash in debt.
That’s why Bain attacks work with a lot of people. It’s not economic, it’s personal. People don’t want a president that will leave them “holding the bag”. When Mitt Romney’s op-ed titled “let Detroit go bankrupt”, it reflected his experience with employees: line items in an investment he and fellow managing partners made. Romney’s seen bankruptcies and layoffs happen all the time and think it’s perfectly fine.
The Russian leader said Romney’s comments strengthened his resolve to oppose NATO’s plan for a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, a system Russia believes will degrade its nuclear deterrent. The U.S. insists the system is aimed at Iran, not Russia.
“I’m grateful to him (Romney) for formulating his stance so clearly because he has once again proven the correctness of our approach to missile defense problems,” Putin told reporters, according to the Russian news agency RIA Novosti.
“The most important thing for us is that even if he doesn’t win now, he or a person with similar views may come to power in four years. We must take that into consideration while dealing with security issues for a long perspective,” he said, speaking after a meeting with Serbian President Tomislav Nikolic, according to Interfax news agency.
First and foremost, we should cut Syria off from its major supporters. The television images from Syria will not change permanently until the underlying strategic terrain changes permanently. Russia should be told in no uncertain terms that it can forget about sustained good relations with the United States as long as it continues to back Assad. We should resume full-scale, indeed accelerated, efforts to construct the limited missile-defense system designed by George W. Bush to protect American territory not against Russia but against rogue states such as Iran and North Korea. But we should immediately make it clear to Moscow that we will begin to consider broadening our missile-defense program to deal with Russian and Chinese ballistic-missile capabilities. We should also announce our withdrawal from the New START arms-control treaty, and our utter disinterest in negotiations to prevent an “arms race” in space. Let Moscow and Beijing think about all that for a while.
Here is John Bolton on the Russia/Georgia conflict before the 2008 election:
Saying this may cause angst in Europe’s capitals, but now is the time to find out if Nato can withstand a potential renewed confrontation with Moscow, or whether Europe will cause Nato to wilt. Far better to discover this sooner rather than later, when the stakes may be considerably higher. If there were ever a moment since the fall of the Berlin Wall when Europe should be worried, this is it. If Europeans are not willing to engage through Nato, that tells us everything we need to know about the true state of health of what is, after all, supposedly a “North Atlantic” alliance.
In August, 2008, on the brink of an international depression, while we were engaged in the two longest wars in our history, Bolton said that it was the best time to escalate tensions with Russia. Remember, Bolton was the US Representative to the UN who was a recess appointment by George W Bush who famously didn’t believe the UN should really exist. He’s a warmonger, and he’s Romney’s foreign policy brains.
Romney outlined his Foreign Policy intentions yesterday during his unneeded press conference after his statement on the Libyan conflict:
ROMNEY: First, confidence in our cause, a recognition that the principles America was based upon are something we shrink from or apologize for; that we stand for that principles.
The second is clarity in our purpose, which is that when we have a foreign policy objective, we describe it honestly and clearly to the American people, to Congress and to the people of the world.
And number three, is resolve in our might: that in those rare circumstances — those rare circumstances where we decide it’s essential for us to apply military might, that we do so with overwhelming force, that we do so in the clarity of a mission, understanding the nature of the U.S. interest involved, understanding when the mission will be complete, what will be left when it is — what will be left behind us when that mission has — has been — has been terminated.
Mind you this tough talk is key to Romney’s foreign policy. Might makes right is what’s key there. Confidence in our cause (sure that we are right), clarity in our purpose (a posture of demanding concessions just because) and our force used overwhelmingly as a solution to problems.
This is Romney’s methodology of foreign policy posture: better early and adversarial posturing than patient and informed action.
From WaPo’s Glen Kessler, here’s how President Jimmy Carter’s opponents treated the hostage crisis during the 1980 campaign:
In April 1980, Reagan was still battling George H.W. Bush for the GOP nomination, while Sen. Edward M. Kennedy was challenging Carter for the Democratic nomination. This is excerpted from The Washington Post reporting on the political fallout:
Carter’s presidential rivals were charitable. Republican George Bush supported the president’s actions without reservation. Ronald Reagan and Edward Kennedy offered sympathy to the families of the dead troopers and called for national “unity.”
Bush was most outspoken, saying, “I unequivocally support the president — no ifs, ands or buts. . . . He made a difficult, courageous decision.”
In strikingly similar formal statements, which they declined to amplify, Reagan and Kennedy expressed sympathy for the family of the eight men killed in the rescue effort, and pledged to preserve “national unity” in the cause of the hostages’ release.
Before breaking off his Michigan campaigning to return to Washington, Kennedy said, “I share the feeling of all Americans at this sad moment for our country. . . . Whatever our other differences, we are one nation in our commitment to the hostages, our concern for their families, and our sorrow for the brave men who gave their lives trying to rescue their fellow citizens.”
A few hours later, Reagan told a Los Angeles press conference, “This is a difficult day for all of us Americans. . . . It is time for us . . . to stand united. It is a day for quiet reflection . . . when words should be few and confined essentially to our prayers.”
It’s why they are at present locking out their referees over a dispute that boils down to an average of $62,500 per team per season over the next seven years. Actually a little less because the number being argued over is a difference of about $10 million to $12 million over seven years so it’s actually less than $2 million a year but let’s make the math easy. To save roughly $62,500 a year per billionaire owner, the NFL will likely enter the season using glorified Pop Warner officials (at least one of whom was allegedly fired by the Lingerie Football League, according to former head of NFL officials Mike Pereira).
And more:
With 119 total officials, it all works out to an average divide of $27,250 per official per year.
Another major dispute flows from retirement benefits. Like many employers, the NFL wants to convert its defined benefit plan to a 401(k) defined contribution plan, shifting the risks of the market to the individual employees. Given that, for most if not all officials, working games is a well-paying hobby, being treated in their hobbies like the vast majority of American workers shouldn’t be a big deal.
The NFL also wants to add 21 more officials (three total crews), in order to provide the league with a “bench” that could be used during the season to replace officials who are struggling. While the league apparently would be paying all officials out of the same pot, if the average increases cited by the league take into account the expanded roster of officials, it should be a non-issue. (It’s likely an issue because the locked-out officials don’t want to have in-season accountability.)
A Screen Capture of ABC News Page: “Diplomat Chris Stevens Slipped Into Libya on a Cargo Ship During Revolution – ABC News” at 9/12/2012 9:46 PM
Apparently ABCNews.go.com’s intelligent, state of the art, news finding engine thinks I want to read about Prince Harry in Vegas (should anyone care but the Queen?), Robin Roberts (love her, but her illness is not world news) and someone I never heard of talking to Katie Couric on her new Oprah Katie in your coffee clatch 2.0 show.
Really, the go.com network always has been a marketing platform, ill suited to delivering news.
A story that shows Ambassador Stevens’ commitment to Libya:
During the early days of the Libyans’ fight to overthrow Moammar Gadhafi, Christopher Stevens wrangled a ride on a Greek cargo ship and sailed into the rebels’ stronghold city of Benghazi. He arrived at a time when the crackle of gunfire could be heard each night.
Stevens and his team didn’t even have a place to stay, but found space in a hotel briefly, moving out after a car bomb went off in the parking lot, according to his own account in State Magazine last year.
Stevens, whose diplomatic foothold were a couple of battered tables, was on literally on the rebels’ side while the revolution was at its most vulnerable and in danger of being crushed by Gadhafi’s troops who were moving on the city. The threat was pushed back at the last minute by the intervention of NATO planes which began bombing Gadhafi’s tanks and troops.
The picture above is very odd from someone who focused on “tone” when scolding Chris Matthews for dressing down Reince Preibus for Romney’s false attack ad on Morning Joe:
Then Priebus and Matthews began to tangle again, after Reince said that Obama was “looking for guidance” from Europe for policy like the health care law.
“What? What are you getting this from? It’s insane,” Matthews said. “What does this have to do with Europe and the foreignization of the guy.”
Co-host Mika Brzezinski said under her breath to Matthews, “let’s work on tone.” Thanks, Mom!
In his convention speech, Obama claimed threat Romney called Russia “our No. 1 enemy.” Romney didn’t use those exact words, but he did refer to Russia as “without question our No. 1 geopolitical foe.” He said the Russians “fight for every cause for the world’s worst actors” in a CNN interview. In a later interview, however, Romney softened his language, this time calling Russia our “No. 1 adversary” in terms of UN votes and emphasized it’s not an enemy of the kind launching missiles at American shores. That’s an important clarification, but it’s worth noting that five months passed before Romney walked back his earlier remarks. Obama’s statement lacked that context but was still largely accurate about Romney’s original description of Russia. We rate the statement Mostly True.
Obama’s statement is not completely true because Romney said foe/adversary instead of enemy. Even though they mean exactly the same thing.
I think Charles Pierce hits on the boring, but simple definition of Liberalism in Barack Obama’s DNC 2012 speech:
“…the hard and frustrating and necessary work of self-government.”
Make no mistake. This little throwaway line was the most direct, and the most serious, challenge that the president threw down at the feet of the Republican ticket on Thursday night because it strikes at the very essence of four decades of conservative political philosophy. We create “the government” we have. “The government” is not imposed from without. It is our creation. Its proper operation is our responsibility.
Understand the value of Democratic Government is that it is in the end a country you can choose. You can choose to be a citizen and you can choose to leave and you can choose who builds your government’s future, but it’s up to you if you stay here.
Wendy Rosen, a Democratic congressional candidate challenging Rep. Andy Harris (R-MD), withdrew from the race on Monday after the state party confronted her with evidence she voted in both Maryland and Florida in 2006 and 2008.
Note, this was caught by the state party and self reported, but that won’t matter. It’s new ACORN. Thanks.
The simple fact of the matter: there just aren’t enough loopholes to close to keep the rich at their already low tax rates. Ezra Klein makes it plain and simple:
2) The reason Romney’s plan doesn’t work is very simple. The size of the tax cut he’s proposing for the rich is larger than all of the tax expenditures that go to the rich put together. As such, it is mathematically impossible for him to keep his promise to make sure the top one percent keeps paying the same or more.
Tax Expenditures = tax exemptions, exclusions and deductions, etc. Basically, there are no amount of loopholes to be closed to offset any tax cut and maintain revenue.
You know what else proposes cutting income tax rates while eliminating loopholes and “widening the tax base”? Simpson Bowles. In reality, Simpson Bowles would be a tax cut for rich people’s income and a tax increase for middle and lower class peoples income.
Shame on Democratic Maryland State Delegate Emmett C. Burns (hailing from district in Maryland’s District 10) for his anti-free speech letter to silence dissent to his bigoted position on marriage equality:
“I find it inconceivable that one of your players, Mr. Brendon Ayanbadejo, would publicly endorse Same-Sex marriage, specifically as a Ravens football player,” Burns writes.
“I am requesting that you take the necessary action, as a National Football League Owner, to inhibit such expressions from your employees and that he be ordered to cease and desist such injurious actions. I know of no other NFL player who has done what Mr. Ayanbadejo is doing.”
[…]
Ayanbadejo, 36, is unique in his vocal support of same-sex marriage as an NFL player, but he says he’s surprised a politician would suggest his free speech be suppressed. He says the Ravens have said nothing to him about his stance, but he has received some “high-fives” and “kudos” around the team’s headquarters here.
“I was surprised. It’s what our country was founded on,” he says of his free speech rights. “For somebody to try to take that away from me I was pretty surprised, from a politician especially.
Obama this year changed his stance on gay marriage, becoming the first sitting U.S. president to support it. Ayanbadejo began vocally supporting the cause in 2008, and says his issue isn’t focused on homosexuals.
“Its an equality issue. I see the big picture,” he says. “There was a time when women didn’t have rights. Black people didn’t have rights. Right now, gay rights is a big issue and it’s been for a long time. We’re slowly chopping down the barriers to equality.”
“They won’t come into your house and steal your children,” Kluwe wrote to Burns. “They won’t magically turn you into a lustful [vulgar term]. They won’t even overthrow the government in an orgy of hedonistic debauchery because all of a sudden they have the same legal rights as the other 90 percent of our population—rights like Social Security benefits, child care tax credits, Family and Medical Leave to take care of loved ones, and COBRA healthcare for spouses and children.”
Ayanbadejo appeared in a video by Marylanders for Marriage Equality, adding his voice to their cause. Maryland legalized same-sex marriage earlier this year, but there is a ballot initiative in November, hence the linebacker’s support.
[…]
The Ravens issued a statement from team president Dick Cass on Friday: “We support Brendon’s right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment.”
He’s got a right to be hostile.
I don’t know if State Delegate Burns really understands the absurdity of his letter to Steve Biscotti. If he’s anti-marriage equality, ok, that’s your opinion. Bigotry is your right. But he literally asked the white owner of a football team to summon a black football player from the locker room to the front office and tell him to shut his mouth or else there would be trouble. Burns seems damn near unfit to serve. NFLPA Dominique Foxworth stepped up in strong support of his ex teammate’s right to free speech:
“I don’t know if I can come up with a strong enough word, but his request was asinine,” Foxworth said.
“It was frustrating and disappointing, but I was encouraged by the support that Brendon received from the football world, from Chris Kluwe from the Vikings — his letter on Deadspin may not be appropriate for the newspaper, but it was nice to see that support — and the support that the Ravens have given him was great,” said Foxworth, who played for the Ravens from 2009 to 2011. “Even the fans were really supportive of him.”
“I guess the really surprising thing was that once I heard about it, I looked up who Emmitt Burns was,” Foxworth said. “Just to see a 70-something-year-old man who grew up in Jackson, Mississippi, who shares a first name with Emmitt Till, who was essentially a martyr for freedom of speech and freedom of expression… For someone who has had that unique life experience to encourage silencing an individual, you would assume it would go against what everyone someone like that would believe. I can’t imagine that a black person growing up in Mississippi would have ever been in favor of quieting someone’s free speech. It’s odd.”
He says the NFLPA will always support players who use the platform that comes with being a professional athlete to voice their opinions on social issues, even if some people may disagree with those opinions.
“A player should do what they’re comfortable with,” said Foxworth, a Randallstown native who attended college at Maryland. “I don’t think football players are different than any other human beings, with the exception of having a large platform. I think that’s all the reason to speak out. Whether people agree with what you’re saying or not, it’s your right to say it. I don’t think any social issues have been solved by silencing one group.”
