Will Bain be the Bane of Mitt?

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

I agree with you, but don't think we'd be supporting the same candidate. The problem is that this country is extremely sick. My definition of sick is deeply divided. We are a ship which instead of going left or right is going no where. In the mean time, our country is sliding towards infrastructure problems so serious, it makes me shudder. I sincerely believe that conservatives and liberals (separately) if allowed to work, could fix our budgetary problems, that is until they are thrown out of office by the mob of angry voters who don't like the idea of sacrifice. This is the Achilles heel of Democracy, vulnerable politicians who will be punished for doing the right thing.

And the problem as always is what kind of vision to we want for our country? Do we have social programs that help those in need or is it every man/woman for themselves and corporations running the outfit?

I say they have no vested interest in fixing the problem, because if they did it would shift benefits to us. NOT all the Wall St. mucky mucks they snort cocaine and drink scotch with.

The only way Washington wins is to have us cowering in the corner hoping they throw us a bone. Because they have the majority too dumbed down to be willing to take it back.

Like him or not, go youtube some speeches from the Gipper, he warned Congress about what lay ahead for the nations financial situation.out this

Think about this, the "Fed" does whatever the Fed wants. Bernanke is an appointee, but that's where the relationship ends. The Fed is there simply to protect banking interests, not you and I. They win when we're in debt. Make the middle class flush with money, and they have no way to charge interest and benefit from inflation

And they benefit from us slap fighting over which candidate is the coolest...that shit works well, we're fighting in the streets, they're sneaking into our homes and robbing us blind..

 

[Minor Axis]

There are two ways to approach this:
1. As a Republican/conservative, overlook that your party played a big hand in the run up the debt, refuse to accept responsibility, and blame it all on the black man.
2. As Democrat/liberal, tell yourself that Obama's spending policies were a direct result of what came before him an attempt to keep it all from unraveling.

Maybe the truth is in the middle somewhere. When faced with a major economic upheaval, the government can sit on it's hands like during the Great Depression and let the chips fall where they may or try to be proactive and minimize the damage, with a subsequent run up of debt. Republicans will never ever acknowledge responsibility for their part, so I can't trust them to do the right thing. To a degree I like the Democrats approach to social issues and society, but I admit they can and have over done it. If the GOP and the Dems agreed to work together I might feel hopeful, but I don't see this happening ever. It's a fight to the political death while the country dies in the mean time. I'm a bit hopeless at this point.

I say they have no vested interest in fixing the problem, because if they did it would shift benefits to us. NOT all the Wall St. mucky mucks they snort cocaine and drink scotch with.

The only way Washington wins is to have us cowering in the corner hoping they throw us a bone. Because they have the majority too dumbed down to be willing to take it back.

Like him or not, go youtube some speeches from the Gipper, he warned Congress about what lay ahead for the nations financial situation.out this

Think about this, the "Fed" does whatever the Fed wants. Bernanke is an appointee, but that's where the relationship ends. The Fed is there simply to protect banking interests, not you and I. They win when we're in debt. Make the middle class flush with money, and they have no way to charge interest and benefit from inflation

And they benefit from us slap fighting over which candidate is the coolest...that shit works well, we're fighting in the streets, they're sneaking into our homes and robbing us blind..

The question is, who exactly would you like to see take it back?

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

There are two ways to approach this:
1. As a Republican/conservative, overlook that your party played a big hand in the run up the debt, refuse to accept responsibility, and blame it all on the black man.
2. As Democrat/liberal, tell yourself that Obama's spending policies were a direct result of what came before him an attempt to keep it all from unraveling.

Maybe the truth is in the middle somewhere. When faced with a major economic upheaval, the government can sit on it's hands like during the Great Depression and let the chips fall where they may or try to be proactive and minimize the damage, with a subsequent run up of debt. Republicans will never ever acknowledge responsibility for their part, so I can't trust them to do the right thing. To a degree I like the Democrats approach to social issues and society, but I admit they can and have over done it. If the GOP and the Dems agreed to work together I might feel hopeful, but I don't see this happening ever. It's a fight to the political death while the country dies in the mean time. I'm a bit hopeless at this point.




The question is, who exactly would you like to see take it back?

It's not going back...There's absolutely no empirical evidence that 17-20 trillion dollars worth the debt will do anything but rise until eventually the system breaks for good. Then the banks can take the next step, global currency.

And again, we'll lose. Explain to me exactly how either party can even under their breath joke about righting the economy? If you were a bank, how much more money would you lend someone who has squandered 17 trillion dollars?

Fact, no administration that I remember has lived within the means they were given, they just spend now, give it all away. Can anyone really argue that? And how sensible is bickering over whose candidate pissed away a trillion less? Aren't you kind of splitting hairs pointing fingers over a trillion or so? Bottom line is Obama HAS DONE NOTHING but expand the debt, there's no transparency not like he promised, last time I checked there are earmarks in every spending package, lobbyists still running amuck..... hmmmm

But man he looks cool

 

[Accountable]

There are two ways to approach this:
1. As a Republican/conservative, overlook that your party played a big hand in the run up the debt, refuse to accept responsibility, and blame it all on the black man.

Because the only way to find fault with King Obama is to be racist.
Get off it, partisan.

 

[Minor Axis]

Because the only way to find fault with King Obama is to be racist.
Get off it, partisan.

1. As a Republican/conservative, overlook that your party played a big hand in the run up the debt, refuse to accept responsibility, and blame it all on the foreigner who illegally got elected...

 

[Accountable]

 

[Minor Axis]

Anyone here impressed with Romney's overseas debut? LOL.

If you are not a Romney fan: Newsweek: Mitt Romney's Wimp Factor.

Dodging reporters, fearing his base, hiding his taxes—is Mitt Romney just too insecure to be president? In Newsweek, Michael Tomasky surveys a history of presidential manliness and asks just where Mitt would fit amid the studly swagger of Dubya and Reagan.

 

[Minor Axis]

Mitt, up for the challenge of sticking foot in mouth everywhere he goes!
Mitt, more gaffes like this, please.

In a thoughtful discussion about Israeli prosperity, particularly in comparison to neighboring Palestinians, Romney cited the work of Harvard economic historian David Landes, who had concluded after a lifetime of study that culture was the greatest single factor in explaining a society's successes and failures. "Culture makes all the difference," Romney said, paraphrasing Landes. The Palestinian Authority immediately cried "racism," and their complaints were taken as proof that Romney's diplomatic skills are wanting, as if diplomacy is all about telling countries what they want to hear and offending no one. Does anyone honestly believe that the Palestinians — half ruled by the murderous terrorists of Hamas, half ruled by the kleptocratic thugs of the Palestinian Authority — lack cultural impediments to peace and prosperity? Really?

Mitt is supposed to be a smart guy, right? :tooth

 

[Accountable]

How is that a gaffe?? I mean, sure, he makes 'em, but how is pointing out that culture is key to a society's success or failure one?

 

[Minor Axis]

How is that a gaffe?? I mean, sure, he makes 'em, but how is pointing out that culture is key to a society's success or failure one?

If I have to explain it to you...no, this would be a good project for you, diplomacy 101.

 

[Accountable]

If I have to explain it to you...no, this would be a good project for you, diplomacy 101.

Yup, I expected you wouldn't have an answer and you performed as expected. Did you read the article before you posted it, or did you just assume that since it was USA Today that it would be anti-repub?

From the article:

Outside the hothouses of the election season and the Israel-Palestinian conflict, virtually no one disputes the importance of culture. If you've only read the Cliffs Notes to Max Weber's foundational The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, you'd know this was an utterly defensible, if not wholly uncontroversial, observation.

Though conservatives are more likely to tout this fact than liberals, the truth is virtually every serious liberal believes it to be true to one extent or another. When you hear liberal politicians celebrate diversity as essential to a 21st century economy, they are making a point about culture. When they lament the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow as a partial cause for the various challenges facing the black community, they are making an argument about culture. When they talk about the "culture of corruption" on Wall Street, they're not talking about advances in computerized trading.

 

[Minor Axis]

Yup, I expected you wouldn't have an answer and you performed as expected. Did you read the article before you posted it, or did you just assume that since it was USA Today that it would be anti-repub?

From the article:

I'll reassert: Diplomacy 101.

 

[Maulds]

I believe I read somewhere "Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock."

 

[End Of All]

At least Romney is more of a man than Michelle and Obama could ever be.

And this entire thing with Bain is just a bunch of Bulls***

 

[End Of All]

I believe I read somewhere "Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggie" until you can find a rock."

Oh, and I believe this line came from AUFred

 

[Tim]

At least Romney is more of a man than Michelle and Obama could ever be.

And this entire thing with Bain is just a bunch of Bulls***

And what exactly makes the Mittster a man?

 

[End Of All]

Put it this way, He worked his whole life to earn what he has.

 

[Tim]

Put it this way, He worked his whole life to earn what he has.

I have much more respect for someone who can come from poverty, put himself through the best schools and work for his wealth. That's difficult to do.
Compared to someone born with a silver spoon in his mouth, skate through school on daddies dime and work for a management consulting company that daddy got you into with his connections. Those born into privilege live privileged lives.
Mitt hasn't had a tough day in his life.

 

[Minor Axis]

Huffington Post: Mitt Romney Started Bain Capital with Money from People Tied to Death Squads

In 1983, Bill Bain asked Mitt Romney to launch Bain Capital, a private equity offshoot of the successful consulting firm Bain & Company. After some initial reluctance, Romney agreed. The new job came with a stipulation: Romney couldn't raise money from any current clients, Bain said, because if the private equity venture failed, he didn't want it taking the consulting firm down with it.
When Romney struggled to raise funds from other traditional sources, he and his partners started thinking outside the box. Bain executive Harry Strachan suggested that Romney meet with a group of Central American oligarchs who were looking for new investment vehicles as turmoil engulfed their region.
Romney was worried that the oligarchs might be tied to "illegal drug money, right-wing death squads, or left-wing terrorism," Strachan later told a Boston Globe reporter, as quoted in the 2012 book "The Real Romney." But, pressed for capital, Romney pushed his concerns aside and flew to Miami in mid-1984 to meet with the Salvadorans at a local bank.
It was a lucrative trip. The Central Americans provided roughly $9 million -- 40 percent -- of Bain Capital's initial outside funding, the Los Angeles Times reported recently. And they became valued clients.

Why let morality stand in the way of profits?

 

[Accountable]

I have much more respect for someone who can come from poverty, put himself through the best schools and work for his wealth. That's difficult to do.

Are you implying that Obama came from poverty, or poverty relative to Romney's wealth?

Compared to someone born with a silver spoon in his mouth, skate through school on daddies dime and work for a management consulting company that daddy got you into with his connections. Those born into privilege live privileged lives.
Mitt hasn't had a tough day in his life.

I was watching MSNBC yesterday & was surprised to hear that Daddy Romneybucks didn't give Mitt any money once he turned adult. I don't know if that included school or business connections. Of course, Daddy doesn't need to overtly introduce sonny for sonny to take advantage of business connections. Carrying the name is undoubtedly more than enough to start.

Both gentlemen deserve greatness because of their own individual talents and efforts. I just don't think either are good for America because of their ideologies.