Posts Tagged 2012 presidential election
Mitt Romney is not the most honest guy. In fact, he has been accused, and rightly so, of having crossed into groundbreaking levels of dishonesty during this election year.
Aside from his blatant dishonesty in political matters, there is also something very insincere about him as a person. Whenever he is talking to a crowd, it feels awkward and forced, like he was citing rehearsed lines and catch phrases that he personally doesn’t understand or believe but which his campaign manager told him to say anyway because they are relevant and would score political points. It is like he is forcing himself hard to say those things but because he doesn’t ultimately understand them, much less mean them, it feels insincere.
The man cannot even keep a coherent thought within the same sentence, much less the same campaign or specific policy. During a speech last month he stated that “we may make mistakes as a nation from time to time, and step on other’s toes and we’ll say we’re sorry for that, but apologizing for America is something I will never, ever do.”
Naturally, his audience of gullible sheep and uneducated religious morons wrapped in the US flag, holding a gun and cross, applauded at what he said.
But is that really something we should applaud and strive for in our leader and our nation for that matter? Is not apologizing for and acknowledging your mistakes a virtue? A desirable quality in a leader? Or anyone for that matter?
Do we want someone in the White House who is just too damn arrogant and self-absorbed to ever acknowledge any mistakes made and apologize for them? Or do we want someone with integrity who does apologize and acknowledge mistakes made when the situation warrants it. Jingoists applaud him thinking it is really great to be a nation that bullies others around, disregards international law and institutions, causes war and havoc all over the world without never, ever apologizing for it.
Not only that but Romney lacks any situational awareness or any clue as to how the outlandish things he says have little basis in reality. During a tele-town hall meeting with Wisconsin voters last month, Romney told what he thought was a “humorous” story about how his father once shut down a factory in Michigan and moved production to Wisconsin. This little, supposedly humorous anecdote, was no doubt meant to appeal to the voters of Wisconsin, who were the beneficiaries of the factory shutdown, but in his zeal to appear like he actually does have a clue what it means to have to do a hard day’s work in your life and be a man of the people, he missed the entire second half of his “joke”, namely that his daddy’s heroic attempt at opening a factory in Wisconsin cost 5000+ people in Michigan, where his father was Governor no less, their jobs. That is not funny. But Romney thinks it is because he doesn’t truly understand the consequences of his father’s actions.
He thinks like a businessman and not like a leader or humanitarian. Hence missing the point entirely and thinking his daddy’s deed was hilarious.
And speaking of groundbreaking dishonesty: Paul Ryan wants to end Medicare, forcing seniors to go buy health insurance in the open market – since, you know, insurance companies are dying to insure seniors. Thirty three such seniors being thrown to the den of the insurance industry would help pay for the $200,000 tax break Ryan wants to give to the average millionaire. But Mitt Romney, who supports the “bipartisan group of leaders” on Medicare (i.e. Ryan’s plan) accuses Obama of wanting to get rid of Medicare.
Romney’s presidential campaign is overflowing with such unembarrassed lies and acts of hypocrisy. In fact, he reached an even newer low on dishonesty when he, despite his 2008 call to “let Detroit go bankrupt,” said jus ta few weeks ago during an interview with WEWS-TV in Cleveland that he would “take a lot of credit” for his impact on the U.S. automobile industry’s comeback since his views helped save the industry..
“I pushed the idea of a managed bankruptcy,” Romney said. “And finally, when that was done, and help was given, the companies got back on their feet. So I’ll take a lot of credit for the fact that this industry’s come back.”
The reality looks different, however. Romney’s stance on and opposition to the bailouts and his infamous 2008 New York Times op-ed “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt” in support of those assertions, have come up throughout the campaign, especially ahead of February’s primary in Michigan. In that editorial, Romney argued that a government bailout for ailing auto giants Chrysler and General Motors would do more harm than good.
“If General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye,” Romney wrote. “In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.”
It is, of course, quite hypocritical of him to be against government bail outs when he received a $10 million bailout from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. in 1991. The taxpayers provided the backstop for the FDIC, and even though Bain & Co. went on to make millions more in profits, the fund was never replenished. A small detail that Romney and his supporters conveniently ignore when repeatedly speaking out against the auto industry bail out or any kind of government “interference”.
In this case, Mitt Romney, much like any opportunist, saw the polls about the unpopularity of bailouts and lumped the auto industry in with the bank industry – the auto industry, where his father and so many of his family members had worked – and called for them to go down. He never looked into the eyes of autoworkers getting laid off as factory after factory closed. The auto industry was heading over the cliff, begging for help, and Romney were coolly standing behind, giving his home state a shove over the ledge. And now he has the audacity to claim credit for the auto industry’s rebound.
Mitt Romney Demeans the intelligence of the American People with His Lies
it is important to point out that there is a real reason for why Romney always makes such comments with this dead-pan expression and without a twitch. There is a reason he and his wife – with their five houses, two Cadillacs with elevators and close friends who own football and baseball teams – think that sitting on $250 million of wealth, raising two shiny, life-like sons puts Ann Romney en par with 95% of mothers in this country who don’t enjoy any of those obscene luxuries and it is the reason why Romney says he is unemployed, comparing his quarter of a billion dollar wealth to the $ 7.50 an hour a laid off worker used to make. There is a reason Romney exhibits all the clichés we unfairly assign to used car salesmen, and the reason for that, aside from cold hard ignorance brought on by too much of someone else’s money and greed, is that Romney is genuinely and ridiculously out of touch with not only the citizens of this country but human beings residing on planet Earth in general.
In fact, he is so out of touch with them that any attempts at socializing with them or addressing them in a speech end up in such embarrassing, foot-in-mouth, bozo moments. He is trying hard to appear sincere but because there really is no subsistence and sincerity behind his vacant smile and lofty speeches, it just backfires and he just ends up looking like an asshole.
Mitt Romney is dishonest and his dishonesty just shines through, no matter what he does or how many catch-phrases and talking points he throws at you. He is insincere and fake and a liar and most people (well most intelligent people, which a lot of Americans aren’t unfortunately) realize that.
Romney is one of those people who – in a very Twilight Zone fashion – deserves to be stripped off his wealth, fame and fortune and be rendered a pauper or maybe just an employee at one of the companies Bain Capital bankrupted to see for himself just what life feels like for people who actually have to earn a living instead of just having everything handed to them through theft and exploitation of others.
And make no mistake about it: a thief is exactly what Mitt Romney is. Someone who doesn’t pay his taxes or tries to avoid having to pay them but enjoys the benefits that a government that is paid for by taxes provides to him, is a thief. People accuse him of flip flopping, but that is really not true because Romney has been pretty consistent throughout his political career with one thing and one thing only, namely amassing power and wealth for the few at the expense of the middle class.
He also did not get rich by creating products people wanted, he got rich by taking over companies, loading them up with debt, pushing them into bankruptcy, then laying people off and canceling their health benefits. As governor of Massachusetts he did the same thing: his party ruined the economy, he cut education, raised fees on the middle class to benefit the wealthy and his state ranked 47 in job creation. So there is a consistent narrative there.
A lot of people argue that this is just nothing but begrudging someone of their wealth; jealousy. But such responses usually come from people who have a very narrow understanding of the mechanisms that have allowed people like Romney to become rich in the first place. Because let’s face it, no one becomes that obscenely rich without having stepped on people. It is the law of nature. Zero sum.
In order for one person to own more than other people combined, he has to take it away from them. Back in the day that was done directly, now it is in the form of low wages, high taxes (for middle class wage earners and poor people) and other structural means of exploitation.
Therefore telling people who criticize Mitt Romney and the 1% that they are begrudging them their wealth and “success” is like telling a burglary victim that their demands for justice to get their things back constitute begrudging thieves of their well earned riches. It is absurd.
Mitt Romney is a corporate raider who made money bankrupting companies and with it the people that worked for them. So is criticism warranted? Is questioning his wealth, his motives and priorities as well as wanting to see ten years of tax returns, an important question to ask when considering him for the office of the presidency?
You bet that it is.
If there is any kinds of questions one ought to ask potential future leaders then they are exactly of this nature. Someone who has no clue how 99% of the people in the world, much less the United States, live; someone who – in his heart of hearts – cannot relate to wage earners and people who don’t own sports teams no matter how hard he tries, is not fit to be the President. He is not fit to be a leader.
Mitt Romney wants to run this country like a business. In fact, his only claim for the presidency is that he is a great businessman and that he can apply those business principles that enriched Bain to this country. But the point of government is that it is not a business. In fact, a government cannot and ought not to be run like a business because by definition, the role of the government is governance and not a profit making, which is the goal of business.
Ultimately, America is not a corporation. America is an idea, a vision and someone like Mitt Romney would destroy that vision.
The only way a government can function as an effective, unbiased entity and governing body is when it does not have a profit motive. Imagine if the EPA was run by Koch industries or the FDA by Monstanto. Think cancer is an epidemic now? Wait for he pandemic levels it will reach when Koch and Monstanto are in charge.
Mitt Romney, while a rich man, is free of the ravages of intelligence and I must say that I do find it degrading for Obama to even have to stoop so low and debate someone so intellectually and emotionally challenged and inferior as Mitt Romney. Someone with such a fundamental weakness of character.
Romney does not have the class, etiquette or even level of Obama. He has little integrity, in fact he is a proven liar, he lacks empathy and his flip flopping, while subject to a lot of good jokes, really is just dangerous.
An opportunist is worse than someone who actually takes a stand on something, be it on the Left or Right.
Romney has no integrity, neither does his wife and neither does the entire cause of Republicans in this election; causes that are aimed at destroying everything this country was founded on and which made it what it is today.
Don’t think for one second that being born with a silver spoon in your mouth and robbing people, as Romney did, gives you class, integrity or renders you a capable leader. We don’t need anyone in The White House who only caters to the needs of the few rich at the expense of everyone else and who views women as second class citizens. We need men of honor and integrity and while I personally have not been very happy with a lot of Obama’s policy decisions, such as extending tax breaks to the rich and how he handled BP and health care, he has proven to have more integrity and honor than any of these GOP candidates could ever dream of having, especially Mitt Romney.
I would hope that people care enough to remember these things when casting a vote this fall.
…no matter how much they like to convince most of the sheep in this country of the contrary.
I hate it when the media misrepresent facts either through omission or by inserting their own interpretation into something someone said in order to score a controversial headline and equally controversial outpouring as a result.
Wednesday night, Hilary Rosen, criticized Ann Romney accusing her of failing to understand the economic concerns of women.
Repeat after me: for failing to understand the economic concerns of women.
During a discussion on CNN’s “AC360” she said: “What you have is Mitt Romney running around saying ‘well you know, my wife tells me that what women really care about is economic issues. And when I listen to my wife, that’s what I’m hearing.‘ Guess what, his wife has actually never worked a day in her life […] She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing in terms of how do we feed our kids, how do we send them to school and how do we and why we worry about their future.”
This resulted in a shitsotrm on the Romney camp and it prompted Ann Romney to join Twitter raising a stink over Rosen’s remark, completely twisting and turning it around and making it what it never was by stating that she “made a choice to stay home and raise five boys”. She went on to say “Believe me, it was hard work.” All this resulted in a flurry of clarifications and counter-statements and whatnot, culminating in an appearance on Fox News this morning where Ann Romney basically said that people should vote for her fucking husband.
This afternoon Rosen was finally forced to apologize for something she essentially never said or implied.
While everyone was at it, former first lady Barbara Bush also decided to chime in on the debate, commenting on how women who stay at home are “wonderful” just as women who choose to work are “wonderful”. She went on to say that while she is not critical of Hilary she is “sorry she took a knock at those of us who chose and who were able to – and that’s very important able -to stay home.”
But that is the whole point!!
I am totally flabbergasted.
First of all, what Rosen was saying was not in any shape a commentary on the “in home vs career moms” debate or the value of household work vs the value of a career. The point Rosen was trying to make is that Ann Romney would not know what being concerned about economics means to a woman because she has never been one of them. She was born into a wealthy family that fully supported her and after hopping around from one college to another having a good time traveling to France and waiting for Romney, she finally got married at the age of twenty and stayed at home to take care of him and the kids. She never had to go looking for a job, writing a resume, getting up at 7 in the morning to get to work, pay for expensive daycare while sacrificing other things. In short, she has never been a wage earner who knows what those challenges women face are.
When you are someone who, before she even had kids, never did a hard day’s work in her life in terms of being a wage earner and understanding the challenges women face in that regard and when you – after you had kids – got to stay at home and take care of the kids because of a rich husband whose obscene wealth insulated you from the economic challenges that stay-at-home moms or women in general face, then you are failing to understand the economic concerns of women. Period.
And that is the point Rosen was making. A very valid point for which she should never have apologized and I find it newsworthy and quite outrageous that Ann Romney and everyone thinks she is en par with any other woman who stayed at home.
In fact, Mitt Romney himself has never done a hard day’s work in his life. He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth and he made money as a corporate raider bankrupting companies. Right now he is making more in a day than most make in a year. He operates and thinks on different orders of magnitude. He probably does have $ 10,000 in his pocket and I seriously doubt he even knows what a dollar bill looks like or feels like in your hands.
The Romneys are out of touch with the realities and challenges that plague most Americans and are very real to them, as evidenced by the myriad of insensitive, outlandish comments made by Romney these past few months, such as how much he loves football because a lot of his friends own football teams, his impromptu 10,000 dollar bet with Santorum and by saying things like (and I am paraphrasing) “oh yeah I do make money from speaking engagements but it [374,000 according to his tax records] is not much.”
So sorry Ann, but staying in your Ivory Tower ordering the nannies and staff to feed and clothe the kids and clean up the house because you married rich and have nothing better to do is not what being a stay-at-home mom is about, not does it constitute hard work or make you part of the crowd that understands the economic challenges women face.
Hillary Rosen was right on and it is a shame she had to apologize to please phony, overprivileged pukes like you and your husband who are completely out of touch with the realities of most Americans, heck most human beings on Planet Earth, and who are just about the worst things that could happen to this country.