Will Bain be the Bane of Mitt?

[Tim]

Agreed. Now carry it through. What has the "liberal" side of the Supreme Court done to decentralize power, meaning take power from Washington? It's not a rhetorical question.

You pointed out a partisan tiff, nothing more.

I really can't believe you are asking such a question.

The supreme court doesn't do anything to decentralize the power of the government.

The US Supreme Court has 3 basic functions.
Settle disputes between the states.
Hear appeals from state and federal courts.
Determine constitutionality of federal laws.

The US Supreme Court is a reactive body, not a proactive body as you are suggesting.

 

[Accountable]

The hard part would be to implement this. I think they would still organize themselves into loose blocks as if they had secret parties. One of the big things is to keep huge amounts of money out of elections dumped there for example by billionaires with agendas. And I'll add, Corporations should have no ability to inject money. I'd be happy if they went to public financing. This is one example of were tax payer money would be well spent and limit political advertising to the year before the election. I thought I read that in the U.K. or somewhere like that you don't see political ads until just 6 months before an election.

The DNc/RNC enable more anonymous injections of huge dollars directly to the candidate than anyone. I don't care if they have loose blocks & whatnot. Like you, it's the money I want to clean out.

As for billionaires, I'm not sure how much of an impact they really have, compared to the corporations. I'd rather cleanse the system of corporate entities first, then decide if anything else needs to be done.

 

[Minor Axis]

The DNc/RNC enable more anonymous injections of huge dollars directly to the candidate than anyone. I don't care if they have loose blocks & whatnot. Like you, it's the money I want to clean out.

As for billionaires, I'm not sure how much of an impact they really have, compared to the corporations. I'd rather cleanse the system of corporate entities first, then decide if anything else needs to be done.

My understanding is that a billionaire kept the slimy Newt afloat for much longer than he should have allowing him to pollute the environment with his noxious gases for an unbearable length of time.

 

[Accountable]

I really can't believe you are asking such a question.

The supreme court doesn't do anything to decentralize the power of the government.

The US Supreme Court has 3 basic functions.
Settle disputes between the states.
Hear appeals from state and federal courts.
Determine constitutionality of federal laws.

The US Supreme Court is a reactive body, not a proactive body as you are suggesting.

Nope. Not suggesting that.

The Supreme Court can centralize or decentralize power through their reactive authority.
* Settle disputes between the states: Frankly, I haven't heard of a case like that, but they could easily rule that whatever is in dispute is now a federal matter.
* Hear appeals from state and federal courts and Determine constitutionality of federal laws: The second comes from the first. I'm not aware of any law going directly to the Supreme Court to determine constitutionality. Every case they hear is ostensibly to weigh the issue against the Constitution. If the justices decide it is a state issue, I would assume they would simply refuse to hear the case. I'd love to hear of them striking down a federal law.
I searched online and the most recent time I could find was this:

Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Co.
Date 1935
By a 5-4 vote the court struck down the Railroad Retirement Act which established pensions for railroad workers on the ground that it exceeded federal authority under the commerce clause.

So, clearly the Supreme Court is not tremendously eager to prevent Washington from centralizing power.

Today they decided that unions had to notify non-members when they were going to change fees and allow them to opt out of paying them. Good thing, right? Unions are private clubs. The federal gov't shouldn't be getting involved in them in the first place. I know this has been going on for generations; that doesn't make it right. There are tons of legislation involving unions. Not one syllable should have been written, certainly not at the federal level. Any justification would require a creative reinterpretation of the Constitution.

This is just the latest. There is a long list. It would be even more telling to weed through the cases the Court has refused to hear and analyze the trends that would bring up.. Fortunately for them, no one has that kind of time.

 

[Minor Axis]

The Caymans: where patriotic Leaders hide their stash. This is the guy I want for President:

Outside The Beltway: Mitt Romney's Offshore Bank Accounts.

Although it is not apparent on his financial disclosure form, Mitt Romney has millions of dollars of his personal wealth in investment funds set up in the Cayman Islands, a notorious Caribbean tax haven.

Official documents reviewed by ABC News show that Bain Capital, the private equity partnership Romney once ran, has set up some 138 secretive offshore funds in the Caymans.

 

[Minor Axis]

Romney's Bain Tenure Draws Dispute

Romney says he gave up tenor at Bain in 1999. This was when they started outsourcing jobs, however...

At issue is when Romney left Bain, and whether he was at the helm when it sent jobs overseas. The documents, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, place Romney in charge of Bain from 1999 to 2001, a period in which the company outsourced jobs and ran companies that fell into bankruptcy.

But at least three times since then, Bain listed Romney as the company's "controlling person," as well as its "sole shareholder, sole director, chief executive officer and president." And one of those documents -- as late as February 2001 -- lists Romney's "principal occupation" as Bain's managing director.

From the Obama campaign:

The Obama campaign called the SEC documents detailing Romney's role post-1999 a "big Bain lie." And Obama deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter said the presumptive GOP nominee may have even engaged in illegal activity. "Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony," she said, "or he is misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people."

Anyone from the pro-Romney forces worried about this?

 

[UncleBacon]

if you rag on romney for bain you can rag on obama for doing the same thing but at greater expense of the tax payers...and I'm pretty sure you don't need me to type out the long list of companies that obama has given millions or billions of dollars to that have failed and that have outsourced their work....is romney a rino? yeah I think he is...is obama an underquallified idiot that has helped run this country into the ground? absolutely....I'm not a huge romney supporter but I do think he's got a better grasp on how to create jobs and budget the economy than obama does...

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Of course it was. It handed the government into the hands of the corporations. It doesn't get any more centralized than that.

That happened when the Fed was created. It's been 100's of years too late

 

[Tim]

if you rag on romney for bain you can rag on obama for doing the same thing but at greater expense of the tax payers...and I'm pretty sure you don't need me to type out the long list of companies that obama has given millions or billions of dollars to that have failed and that have outsourced their work....is romney a rino? yeah I think he is...is obama an underquallified idiot that has helped run this country into the ground? absolutely....I'm not a huge romney supporter but I do think he's got a better grasp on how to create jobs and budget the economy than obama does...

Nobody has a problem with mittster outsourcing jobs.
The problem is the fact that he is running on his record of job creation, he is trying to say that his record of creating jobs is a good one. Now people are calling him on that and showing that he didn't in fact create jobs.
This is not a matter of crucifying him for outsourcing jobs, this is a matter of calling him on his misrepresentation of the facts. There is a big difference.

And i would love to hear how you think Obama ran the country into the ground. Wasn't the economy in the crapper and still falling while he took office? Has the economy come up significantly since then? We went from losing 800,000 jobs a month to gaining jobs every month. How is that possible if he is running the country into the ground? Wouldn't the economy be worse? Wouldn't we be losing even more jobs a month than when he took office?
The country is still in bad shape but it's in a much better place than when he took office, so logic has it that things improved.... right?

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Nobody has a problem with mittster outsourcing jobs.
The problem is the fact that he is running on his record of job creation, he is trying to say that his record of creating jobs is a good one. Now people are calling him on that and showing that he didn't in fact create jobs.
This is not a matter of crucifying him for outsourcing jobs, this is a matter of calling him on his misrepresentation of the facts. There is a big difference.

And i would love to hear how you think Obama ran the country into the ground. Wasn't the economy in the crapper and still falling while he took office? Has the economy come up significantly since then? We went from losing 800,000 jobs a month to gaining jobs every month. How is that possible if he is running the country into the ground? Wouldn't the economy be worse? Wouldn't we be losing even more jobs a month than when he took office?
The country is still in bad shape but it's in a much better place than when he took office, so logic has it that things improved.... right?

Are we really better off Tim? Or are we just on a new bubble?

 

[Tim]

Are we really better off Tim? Or are we just on a new bubble?

Better off? Yes

Where we need to be? Not even close.


For this country to succeed it needs to change course. Too much of the GDP is through finance and derivatives.
This country needs a strong middle class, a solid backbone that cannot be broken overnight like a financial industry can.

Wages for the middle class have absolutely flat lined since the 70's, that needs to be fixed. This drop in income is directly related to the fact that the powers to be wanted America to become a consumer of the worlds products while we stopped producing our own. We have become a service industry nation and that will never work long term. We need to be the leader in manufacture and technology. We NEED that backbone back.

We need to reward those companies that hire in America and punish those who don't with high tarrifs

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

Better off? Yes

Where we need to be? Not even close.


For this country to succeed it needs to change course. Too much of the GDP is through finance and derivatives.
This country needs a strong middle class, a solid backbone that cannot be broken overnight like a financial industry can.

Wages for the middle class have absolutely flat lined since the 70's, that needs to be fixed. This drop in income is directly related to the fact that the powers to be wanted America to become a consumer of the worlds products while we stopped producing our own. We have become a service industry nation and that will never work long term. We need to be the leader in manufacture and technology. We NEED that backbone back.

We need to reward those companies that hire in America and punish those who don't with high tarrifs

Simple question with a very complex answer:

At one point do you think the trillions of dollars exhausted by many administrations to attempt to correct the economy is going to come home to roost? Hopefully you realize that that money is backed by virtually nothing.

I could care less about healthcare, abortion, Romneys stint at Bain. Here's what concerns me

Bernanke sat stone faced in front of a congressional panel and offered NO reasonable answer for righting the off balance. And oh by the way, his employer MAKES THE FUCKING MONEY TIM.

 

[Tim]

I don't sweat the debt... and here's why.

The debt would vanish virtually overnight if the middle class was where it's suppose to be. If this country had a strong middle class our debt wouldn't even be an issue.

All this talk of not being able to pay of the trillions in debt never takes into account a rising middle class. Their calculations are based on status quo.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

I don't sweat the debt... and here's why.

The debt would vanish virtually overnight if the middle class was where it's suppose to be. If this country had a strong middle class our debt wouldn't even be an issue.

All this talk of not being able to pay of the trillions in debt never takes into account a rising middle class. Their calculations are based on status quo.

Nothing from nothing means nothing.

Money backed by nothing is worth nothing

 

[Tim]

We as a country are very short sighted, we focus on the wrong thing, the debt. We need to focus on making a strong and vibrant middle class and the debt will take care of itself.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

We as a country are very short sighted, we focus on the wrong thing, the debt. We need to focus on making a strong and vibrant middle class and the debt will take care of itself.

More than half the money in the world is controlled by one family. How does the middle class plan on getting their hands on that?

 

[Tim]

More than half the money in the world is controlled by one family. How does the middle class plan on getting their hands on that?

*locks and loads* Follow me!

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

*locks and loads* Follow me!

Kinda where I was heading with that

I like rhetorical questions, you should know that by now

 

[Tim]

Kinda where I was heading with that

I like rhetorical questions, you should know that by now

And i like answering your rhetorical questions with even more ridiculously rhetorical questions.

 

[UncleBacon]

Nobody has a problem with mittster outsourcing jobs.
The problem is the fact that he is running on his record of job creation, he is trying to say that his record of creating jobs is a good one. Now people are calling him on that and showing that he didn't in fact create jobs.
This is not a matter of crucifying him for outsourcing jobs, this is a matter of calling him on his misrepresentation of the facts. There is a big difference.

And i would love to hear how you think Obama ran the country into the ground. Wasn't the economy in the crapper and still falling while he took office? Has the economy come up significantly since then? We went from losing 800,000 jobs a month to gaining jobs every month. How is that possible if he is running the country into the ground? Wouldn't the economy be worse? Wouldn't we be losing even more jobs a month than when he took office?
The country is still in bad shape but it's in a much better place than when he took office, so logic has it that things improved.... right?

ahh quick to blame bush without actually coming out and playing that card....people are quick to forget or just didn't know between 2001 and 2007 the unemployment rate in this country was at and all time low...somewhere between 4 and 4 1/2 percent...he's has made a series of quick fixes that helped fudge numbers temporarily to make things look like they could be improving....he is projected to have spend 6 trillion by the end of his first term which is a mind blowing number considering that every president combined that has come before him didn't even spend that much...bush was called unpatriotic for being between 650 and 800 billion in debt which are large numbers themselves and said to be selling our childrens future to china....I would say obama pretty much put the nail into that coffin for our kids future....he made the promises to spend that money on shovel ready jobs to help fix the infrastructure of this country....the infrastructure is failing because all that money went to bogus bailouts to corporations and unions that back him....I think the question is what has he done that has made this country better....he has been warned about several of these failing companies but yet he still gave them millions some cases billions of dollars going against what he was told just for them to turn around claim bankruptcy...don't worry he made them rich first....I've never been a obama supporter and never will be but don't get that confused with me wanting to see him fail....he fails this country fails and I by no means want this country to fail...the fact is he failed this country as a leader \