Republicans and conservatives have touted the greatness of market approaches to solve all the nation's problems, health insurance included. In the discussion and the analysis apparently it was lost that the failing health insurance system we were trying fix, the was precisely a system based on free market and private insurance companies. So by that standard alone it should have been proof enough that the market approach was a failure. But let's table that for the moment.
Back to free markets and along those lines, Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, promoted years ago a free market approach to the health coverage crisis that included an individual mandate to carry health insurance, an expansion of Medicaid so the poor could comply with the mandate, a marketplace or exchange fueled by private insurers for those who do not qualify for Medicaid and financial subsidies to purchase plans in the exchange. Sounds familiar? Republican Mitt Romney used that approach in his famous healthcare reform when governor Massachusetts aka, Romneycare. No surprises here as we have a Republican governor establishing a program based on the proposal from a conservative think tank.
Until now this is pretty public knowledge, at least to those who pay enough attention. Enter now Obama and the Democrats. After elected president, Obama using his characteristic effort to be pragmatic and reaching across, decided to implement a national health insurance reform plan based on the Heritage Foundation idea and Romneycare. And all hell breaks lose. The new plan dubbed Obamacare is now socialism, a government takeover, an infringement on individual's rights, a liberal conspiracy, etc, etc. I think we all remember the spectacle.
Now Obamacare is law, ratified by the Supreme Court and being implemented across the nation. Yes, republicans continue their obstruction and sabotage, Koch brothers have spent millions in pizza and beer parties to convince young people not to enroll in the plan (however Koch bros. have not said if they will pay for the medical bills of those young people if it happens they get ill or in an accident), many republican states refuse to cooperate, conservative keep groups filing lawsuits, and the right wing loonies in the streets are predicting the end of the world, etc, etc.
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Sunday, November 3, 2013
When the floor falls
The safety net (food stamps, social security and the social health care network comprised of Medicaid, Medicare and now Obamacare) makes a difference in the daily lives millions of people. It is the difference between living in misery or living with some dignity. The difference between eating that night or going to bed hungry. The difference between getting treatment when sick or injured or dying. No one in their sane mind could argue against the need of having food, medical attention and some income for daily living, unless of course, if you are a republican.
The safety net means peace of mind and freedom. You know that if your luck turns south and you end up in the ranks of poverty, you will have help for food and medical treatment, until you can get back on your feet. You pay to Medicare and Social Security during all your working years and you know that you will have a pension and healthcare when you retire. No one can argue against this, unless of course, if you are a republican.
Imagine America back in the old days, when the current safety net was not available. Back when your own personal savings were your only hope of income and healthcare during retirement. You surely would be more afraid of leaving that dead end job, and even more afraid of being laid off. You may think twice before taking that business venture. Saving for a pension and healthcare would become two new bills to pay every month, consuming a good chunk of your budget. Those who could not manage to save, or did not save enough, or did not invest wisely would end up in misery shortly after retirement. Abuses toward workers would grow, especially toward older workers. Workers bargaining position (regardless of union status) would weaken, driving salaries and benefits down.
Without the safety net the labor makeup of America would be very similar to a third world country. The gap between the rich and poor would grow even wider and the middle class would disappear completely. Working America would resemble one big pool of modern day slave labor. Destroying the safety net benefits the top 1% and that is why republicans are pushing for it. After all, republicans are just the political agents of the wealthy and their corporations.
While Washington discusses how to balance budgets at the expense of the poor and middle class, very little has been said about corporate welfare, tax loopholes and the bloated defense budget. Funny (and contradictory) is that republicans believe that jobs and economic prosperity come from the top down, but balanced budgets come from the bottom up.
The safety net means peace of mind and freedom. You know that if your luck turns south and you end up in the ranks of poverty, you will have help for food and medical treatment, until you can get back on your feet. You pay to Medicare and Social Security during all your working years and you know that you will have a pension and healthcare when you retire. No one can argue against this, unless of course, if you are a republican.
Imagine America back in the old days, when the current safety net was not available. Back when your own personal savings were your only hope of income and healthcare during retirement. You surely would be more afraid of leaving that dead end job, and even more afraid of being laid off. You may think twice before taking that business venture. Saving for a pension and healthcare would become two new bills to pay every month, consuming a good chunk of your budget. Those who could not manage to save, or did not save enough, or did not invest wisely would end up in misery shortly after retirement. Abuses toward workers would grow, especially toward older workers. Workers bargaining position (regardless of union status) would weaken, driving salaries and benefits down.
Without the safety net the labor makeup of America would be very similar to a third world country. The gap between the rich and poor would grow even wider and the middle class would disappear completely. Working America would resemble one big pool of modern day slave labor. Destroying the safety net benefits the top 1% and that is why republicans are pushing for it. After all, republicans are just the political agents of the wealthy and their corporations.
While Washington discusses how to balance budgets at the expense of the poor and middle class, very little has been said about corporate welfare, tax loopholes and the bloated defense budget. Funny (and contradictory) is that republicans believe that jobs and economic prosperity come from the top down, but balanced budgets come from the bottom up.
Saturday, October 26, 2013
Repubs, Dems, Businesses and the American People Need Obamacare to Work
Americans are ready for health insurance. Americans want health insurance. Americans know the necessity for health insurance. By instinct alone we understand the connections. We all need medical treatment or die; but getting medical treatment is not free; health insurance pays for medical treatment; Obamacare is the law that provides the health insurance that pays for that medical treatment that you need to live longer and healthier. So, at a minimum, just as a matter of pure survival, each American understands the need for Obamacare to work. That is why the popularity of the law is actually increasing the more the right wing crazies try to mess with it.
Businesses need Obamacare to work. Obamacare gives businesses the freedom and flexibility to be more competitive. Many jobs are being created due to Obamacare and many more will be created. The health insurance industry has invested millions of dollars in product development, so they want that investment back. Obamacare means 30 million new customers for the health insurance industry and no business person in their sane mind, would say no, and sabotage that opportunity, especially when many of those customers are coming with a subsidy check in hand. Republicans always say that the private sector is the solution to any problem. But if the private sector can't make work a marketplace completely comprised of private insurers (remember there is no Public Option available), then they will have finally proved that the private sector is not the solution for our current health insurance crisis. The only option would be a socialized health insurance system. Something maybe like Medicare-For-All. So again, either Obamacare works or it spells the end of the private health insurance industry as we know it. Chew on that.
Democrats need Obamacare to work for obvious reasons. It is the last leg of the safety net tripod: (food for the poor (Food Stamps), minimum retirement income (Social Security), health coverage for all (Medicaid, Medicare, Obamacare). Let's remember that Liberals and Democrats are the only ones who really care about the welfare of the totality of the population (from poor to middle class to rich). Conservatives and Republicans don't believe it is worth it to provide protection, help and support to the poor and middle class, only the rich. So yes, it is a victory for Democrats and Liberals, but very part of our mission and philosophy of social justice.
Finally, believe it or not Republicans need Obamacare to work. Obviously Republicans don't want to provide a victory to Democrats, but that's beyond the point. Democrats already won the Obamacare war. What remains are those last skirmishes of any war. Those pockets of resistance that always take longer to accept their fate and surrender. Republicans don't care about the welfare of the poor and middle class, so just saying they should support Obamacare for the good of the country, is a plain waste of time. So, let's put it in terms they can understand. Either Republicans help Obamacare work or lose further. Why? People want health insurance. So, either they get health insurance or lose. Businesses (true GOP bosses) need Obamacare to work. So, either help the Obamacare marketplace work or else. A piece of advice to Republicans. We are keeping scores and documenting every act of sabotage against Obamacare and we are taking that into the upcoming elections. By 2014 and 2016 the infamous website will be working smoothly. Do you really want to keep up this treasonous sabotage and keep giving ammunition that will be thrown back in your faces in 2014 and 2016 elections? Do you really want to see commercials of people with cancer and other illnesses, or small children getting medical attention thanks to Obamacare, while we remind people that Republicans for political purposes, tried to sabotage that healthcare they are receiving ...? uhm...If you do, then be my guests. We will be happy to run on a platform of Obamacare, while you run on an anti-Obamacare platform.
See, we ALL need Obamacare to work each for different reasons. If trying to destroy Medicare and Social Security has proved to be a loser strategy, trying to destroy Obamacare is now also a loser strategy. Don't believe it? Just look then at the current state of the GOP and Tea Party.
Businesses need Obamacare to work. Obamacare gives businesses the freedom and flexibility to be more competitive. Many jobs are being created due to Obamacare and many more will be created. The health insurance industry has invested millions of dollars in product development, so they want that investment back. Obamacare means 30 million new customers for the health insurance industry and no business person in their sane mind, would say no, and sabotage that opportunity, especially when many of those customers are coming with a subsidy check in hand. Republicans always say that the private sector is the solution to any problem. But if the private sector can't make work a marketplace completely comprised of private insurers (remember there is no Public Option available), then they will have finally proved that the private sector is not the solution for our current health insurance crisis. The only option would be a socialized health insurance system. Something maybe like Medicare-For-All. So again, either Obamacare works or it spells the end of the private health insurance industry as we know it. Chew on that.
Democrats need Obamacare to work for obvious reasons. It is the last leg of the safety net tripod: (food for the poor (Food Stamps), minimum retirement income (Social Security), health coverage for all (Medicaid, Medicare, Obamacare). Let's remember that Liberals and Democrats are the only ones who really care about the welfare of the totality of the population (from poor to middle class to rich). Conservatives and Republicans don't believe it is worth it to provide protection, help and support to the poor and middle class, only the rich. So yes, it is a victory for Democrats and Liberals, but very part of our mission and philosophy of social justice.
Finally, believe it or not Republicans need Obamacare to work. Obviously Republicans don't want to provide a victory to Democrats, but that's beyond the point. Democrats already won the Obamacare war. What remains are those last skirmishes of any war. Those pockets of resistance that always take longer to accept their fate and surrender. Republicans don't care about the welfare of the poor and middle class, so just saying they should support Obamacare for the good of the country, is a plain waste of time. So, let's put it in terms they can understand. Either Republicans help Obamacare work or lose further. Why? People want health insurance. So, either they get health insurance or lose. Businesses (true GOP bosses) need Obamacare to work. So, either help the Obamacare marketplace work or else. A piece of advice to Republicans. We are keeping scores and documenting every act of sabotage against Obamacare and we are taking that into the upcoming elections. By 2014 and 2016 the infamous website will be working smoothly. Do you really want to keep up this treasonous sabotage and keep giving ammunition that will be thrown back in your faces in 2014 and 2016 elections? Do you really want to see commercials of people with cancer and other illnesses, or small children getting medical attention thanks to Obamacare, while we remind people that Republicans for political purposes, tried to sabotage that healthcare they are receiving ...? uhm...If you do, then be my guests. We will be happy to run on a platform of Obamacare, while you run on an anti-Obamacare platform.
See, we ALL need Obamacare to work each for different reasons. If trying to destroy Medicare and Social Security has proved to be a loser strategy, trying to destroy Obamacare is now also a loser strategy. Don't believe it? Just look then at the current state of the GOP and Tea Party.
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Make No Mistake, Obamacare Will Prevail
After the GOP Shutdown the news of the day is that the famous website www.healthcare.gov is not working well. Republicans are trying to make it look as if Obamacare is not working. Don't get confused. Obamacare is the law that eliminates pre-existent conditions, makes preventive coverage free, forces large employers to offer quality, affordable health coverage, gives subsidies to poor, and provides a health insurance safety net for all the population, in the form of a market place powered by private insurance companies. That is Obamacare. The user interface is the the website www.healthcare.gov that has failed miserably, when millions of people tried to access it simultaneously. The failing was due to poor planning and implementation. That portion will be fixed. It may take weeks or months, but it will be fixed. The health insurance coverage crisis in this nation has lasted for decades. Waiting a few more weeks or months to fixed glitches seems reasonable. What we have however are Republicans sabotaging Obamacare at every step. From Republican lawsuits, to campaigns promoting young people not to enroll, to governors refusing to establish state exchanges (overloading the federal government). However despite all this, Obamacare will prevail. GOP may be having their day lambasting Obama, Democrats and the government for trying hard to provide quality, affordable health coverage to the nation, but just think what will they do when eventually the website is fixed and the system start running smoothly. The history will remember Democrats and Obama like the heroes in social justice they are while Republicans will go down in history (along with their puppet master Koch brothers) as the ones telling young people not to obtain quality affordable health coverage, just for political reasons, with complete disregard of the welfare of those same young people. Sad and disgusting, but the reality of how low Republicans have sunk.
Monday, October 21, 2013
It is Obamacare's time!
It is Obamacare's time! Availability of affordable, quality Health insurance coverage has been a crisis in this country for decades. But not anymore. Democrats and President Obama pushed the law and passed it against the sabotage of Republicans. The latest sabotage is the take no prisoners, no mercy, scorch the earth approach of the Tea Party lunatics. Republicans failed when Obamacare was in its creation and failed when using the nation's economy as hostage to destroy health coverage access for all. Mark my words, GOP WILL FAIL in destroying Obamacare. Health Care Reform is here to stay. Obamacare is already helping people and helping businesses. Even Republicans out there without health insurance know they need Obamacare. There is no turning back. Not only because millions of liberals are fighting to defend it, but because the lives of millions of people depend on Obamacare. Defending Obamacare and making sure its success is the right thing to do. And what about those glitches n the user interface, the website healthcare.gov? They will be fixed and I guess Republicans will have no choice but to find something else to complain about. (maybe the background, the colors or how big the click button is)
Thursday, October 17, 2013
Not business as usual
Many in the media saying, OK, shutdown is over, now back to business as usual. Well, not back to business as usual. Republicans are in the middle of a civil war looking for a scapegoat for the shutdown disaster. Early indications point to Mitch McConnell as they are too afraid of the Tea Party to target the real culprit, Ted Cruz. On the Democratic side, we all hope Obama finally realized that there is no common sense negotiation with Republicans as long as they are the puppets of the Tea Party. Democrats are also in the process of capitalizing on this victory to increase their size of the Senate and take back the House. It is not business as usual, but a new beginning.
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
Will the history repeat?
It is said that history repeats itself, that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it, etc. The GOP and its Tea Party (Teapublicans) shut down the government to force changes in Obamacare and failed. Failed miserably. They failed because people realized the foolishness of trying to kill a law that will benefit people when fully implemented. People are not dumb. We all have the tendency to complain when things are not working smoothly, but we all understand the difference between something bad in its roots and something good that is having problems getting established. People know Obamacare is good and it is having problems in its implementation. People also know that GOP is trying to sabotage the implementation Obamacare at every step for political reasons. Now do the math and you will understand why 3/4 of the nation turned against the GOP and Teapublicans.
Talking about lessons, GOP was not the only one to ignore history and get slammed. Obama made the same mistake once. It all goes back to the famous shutdown by Newt Gingrich under the Clinton presidency. GOP tried the shutdown fiasco, Clinton stood his ground and the GOP lost. The GOP tried the fiasco again in 2011 and won because Obama did not learn from Clinton's example and rolled over. The GOP tried the fiasco again in 2013 expecting to extort concessions like in 2011, but Obama decided to fight, and won big. Lesson is GOP government shutdown is just a fiasco, a ruse they use to extort when they cannot win elections.
Shutting down the whole federal government and risking the whole economy just to undermine Obamacare was extreme, unnecessary and irresponsible. Now, the Reid deal will open the government until 1/15/2014. The question is if GOP will try the same fiasco again or if they learned the lesson. A related questions is if GOP goes through another shutdown, if Obama has learned the lesson. Only time will tell.
Talking about lessons, GOP was not the only one to ignore history and get slammed. Obama made the same mistake once. It all goes back to the famous shutdown by Newt Gingrich under the Clinton presidency. GOP tried the shutdown fiasco, Clinton stood his ground and the GOP lost. The GOP tried the fiasco again in 2011 and won because Obama did not learn from Clinton's example and rolled over. The GOP tried the fiasco again in 2013 expecting to extort concessions like in 2011, but Obama decided to fight, and won big. Lesson is GOP government shutdown is just a fiasco, a ruse they use to extort when they cannot win elections.
Shutting down the whole federal government and risking the whole economy just to undermine Obamacare was extreme, unnecessary and irresponsible. Now, the Reid deal will open the government until 1/15/2014. The question is if GOP will try the same fiasco again or if they learned the lesson. A related questions is if GOP goes through another shutdown, if Obama has learned the lesson. Only time will tell.
Saturday, November 17, 2012
Texas poised to become a swing state maybe by 2016
This is simple math, Bill Clinton style.
Texas is ripe for blue harvesting. It is a matter now of resources to start organizing.
Spread the word!
- Latinos are 30% of the Texas voting population and we know they support Democrats (70% voted for Obama in the 2012 election)
- African Americans are 12% of the Texas voting population and we know they also support Democrats (93% voted for Obama in the 2012 election)
- Obama still got 41% of the vote in Texas even though the Democratic Party has not invested serious resources in Texas for a while
- Just over 2 million eligible Hispanics did not vote
- Add to that all other democrats who just don't bother because they believe Texas is still a reliable red state (blacks, women, young, Liberal whites. And yes, there are a lot of Liberal whites in Texas) and you get the picture
Texas is ripe for blue harvesting. It is a matter now of resources to start organizing.
Spread the word!
Sunday, October 7, 2012
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Romney lacks even those "executive" skills he likes to brag about
"[Romney] lacks even those "executive" skills he likes to brag about. What kind of executive keeps his money in the Cayman Islands while running for president? What kind of executive renovates his La Jolla mansion -- complete with a new elevator for his cars -- during a campaign? These are not issues of ideology but of common sense. Would you really want this man running your company?" http://huff.to/RRVZ95
Wednesday, April 18, 2012
PPACA is complicated. Why? Obama wanted to accommodate the private market
PPACA is too complicated. But the reason is because of the Obama administration attempted to accommodate the private health insurance market. Private insurance companies would get 30 million new customers with a check in hand. The dream of every business. Reform would have been much simpler if PPACA would have just been Medicare For All.
Will the private insurance companies thank and appreciate that effort? Of course not. They campaigned and will campaign against Obama and democrats.
Instead of proposing real progressive ideas that work, Obama wanted to appease the right and got what he bargained for: wasted his political capital and runs the risk of getting his bill nullified by an activist and political SCOTUS.
Lesson for next time. When you have the power use it to push real liberal solutions, not watered down version designed to appease, that at the end do not solve the problem and do it appease.
Will the private insurance companies thank and appreciate that effort? Of course not. They campaigned and will campaign against Obama and democrats.
Instead of proposing real progressive ideas that work, Obama wanted to appease the right and got what he bargained for: wasted his political capital and runs the risk of getting his bill nullified by an activist and political SCOTUS.
Lesson for next time. When you have the power use it to push real liberal solutions, not watered down version designed to appease, that at the end do not solve the problem and do it appease.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Romney Campaign on Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act: "We will get back to you on that"
From politico
During a conference call held earlier in the morning, a Romney aide was unable to answer a straightforward question about the former governor's position on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which Obama signed into law amid heavy Republican opposition.
"We'll get back to you on that," the aide replied, when asked about the law by The Huffington Post.
Roughly two hours later, Romney's campaign clarified his stance -- but not before the Obama campaign got in a few licks, sending out a statement of disapproval from Ledbetter herself.
During a conference call held earlier in the morning, a Romney aide was unable to answer a straightforward question about the former governor's position on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which Obama signed into law amid heavy Republican opposition.
"We'll get back to you on that," the aide replied, when asked about the law by The Huffington Post.
Roughly two hours later, Romney's campaign clarified his stance -- but not before the Obama campaign got in a few licks, sending out a statement of disapproval from Ledbetter herself.
Darrell Issa Political Hypocrisy on GSA Oversight
From Politico:
A March 2007 piece on NPR said:
"Republicans stuck up for Doan. Darrell Issa of California noted that she has been running GSA for just eight months: 'In your eight months, I think you've probably found what I found in my nearly seven years now: That this is a bureaucracy that will resist you at every point, isn't it?' Doan's reply: 'You're absolutely right.'"
At another hearing three months later, Issa told Doan "I think you've done a very good job of explaining that you are consistent, that you have in fact told the truth and the whole truth, and that, if you've made any mistake, it's been, in fact, allowing those leading questions and what-ifs from people who were trying to make a case on you, from a prosecutor who was not independent in the sense of unbiased but in fact who gets paid to try to find makeable cases, who asked you unreasonable questions and clearly, clearly lied about the fact that this would be kept private -- either lied through his action or lied through his subordinates' action when information that was given under oath, confidentially, under that assurance, consistent with the federal laws, was leaked. And I'm sorry. I'm sorry for your agency and for those men and women who may have gotten 3s or 4s or 2s, not necessarily perfect scores but in fact deserved not to have their private lives and their performance made public."
A March 2007 piece on NPR said:
"Republicans stuck up for Doan. Darrell Issa of California noted that she has been running GSA for just eight months: 'In your eight months, I think you've probably found what I found in my nearly seven years now: That this is a bureaucracy that will resist you at every point, isn't it?' Doan's reply: 'You're absolutely right.'"
At another hearing three months later, Issa told Doan "I think you've done a very good job of explaining that you are consistent, that you have in fact told the truth and the whole truth, and that, if you've made any mistake, it's been, in fact, allowing those leading questions and what-ifs from people who were trying to make a case on you, from a prosecutor who was not independent in the sense of unbiased but in fact who gets paid to try to find makeable cases, who asked you unreasonable questions and clearly, clearly lied about the fact that this would be kept private -- either lied through his action or lied through his subordinates' action when information that was given under oath, confidentially, under that assurance, consistent with the federal laws, was leaked. And I'm sorry. I'm sorry for your agency and for those men and women who may have gotten 3s or 4s or 2s, not necessarily perfect scores but in fact deserved not to have their private lives and their performance made public."
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Fareed Zakaria actually has no idea what is a Liberal
Fareed Zakaria actually has no idea what is a Liberal. Obama wants to paint himself as the adult in the room, while the GOP are babies. However, responsible adults don't get the children get away with it. When children act spoiled, real adults take that as an opportunity to educate the children and putting them in their place. If the adult condones the childish attitude of the kids and let them get away with it, that is not being an adult. It is just another child playing adult. Obama cannot find it inside him because he is afraid of confrontation with the children. The result is the bunch of spoiled kids running the house instead if the adult running the house. Sounds familiar? That's leadership a la Barack Obama.
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/11/defending-the-pragmatic-president/
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/11/defending-the-pragmatic-president/
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Could Romney's Attack on Obama's Jobs Re
Could Romney's Attack on Obama's Jobs Record Backfire?
Why the candidate's new ad criticizing the president on unemployment may end up highlighting his own corporate-raider past.
Certain political ads are hard to fact-check—but that doesn't make them accurate.
Before the Republican presidential debate in New Hampshire on Monday night, Mitt Romney's campaign released a spiffy campaign video/ad that had all the politico wags going gaga. It was a slap at Obama—but it also provided Romney's fellow GOP presidential wannabes with ammo to use against him.
The less-than-two-minute-long spotnotes that "millions have lost their jobs under President Obama" and jabs at the president for recently stating, after the release of a lousy jobs report, that "there's always going to be bumps on the road to recovery." The video then shows about 15 people—of all shapes, sizes, and colors—lying, face-up, on a desert highway in what appears to be the middle of nowhere. One by one they rise, stare into the camera and hold up a Romney campaign placard with a shorthand description of their particular plight handwritten on it. "Mark" notes, "I want a job when I graduate." "Shirley" reports, "Over 50, starting over." "Kevin" proclaims, "The company I worked for just went bankrupt." And each of them solemnly intone, "I'm an American, not a bump in the road."
When the non-bumps finish, the music swells, the camera pans toward the heavens, and these words appear: "Believe in America. November 6, 2012."
The message: Obama doesn't care about you; Romney does. And at the debate on Monday night, Romney proclaimed that Obama has "failed the American people on jobs creation."
This is all in keeping with the general notion sweeping GOP circles that the best way to beat the president next year is to not be the president. That is, any GOP nominee who can pose credibly as the non-Obama—without having to defend a boatload of negatives about him- or herself—will have a decent shot. Which may well be true.
Yet there might be some restraints on how far any candidate can depart from his or her own background to assail the president. This Romney video implies that he gives a damn about the "bumps in the road"—meaning typical American workers. His record as a former head of Bain Capital, a private equity firm that bought and sold firms, though, is at odds with this characterization. Here's how the conservative New York Post recently characterized his tenure at Bain:
The former private equity firm chief's fortune—which has funded his political ambitions from the Massachusetts statehouse to his unsuccessful run for the White House in 2008—was made on the backs of companies that ultimately collapsed, putting thousands of ordinary Americans out on the street. That truth if it becomes widely known could become costly to Romney, who, while making the media rounds recently, told CNN's Piers Morgan that "People in America want to know who can get 15 million people back to work," implying he was that person.
Romney's private equity firm, Bain Capital, bought companies and often increased short-term earnings so those businesses could then borrow enormous amounts of money. That borrowed money was used to pay Bain dividends. Then those businesses needed to maintain that high level of earnings to pay their debts.
In 2007, the Los Angeles Timesreported:
From 1984 until 1999, Romney led Bain Capital, a Boston-based private equity group that earned jaw-dropping profits through leveraged buyouts, debt hedge funds, offshore tax havens and other financial strategies. In some cases, Romney's team closed U.S. factories, causing hundreds of layoffs, or pocketed huge fees shortly before companies collapsed.
During the 2008 campaign, CNNnoted,
Critics note that Romney's tenure as CEO of the leveraged buyout firm Bain Capital resulted in the loss of thousands of jobs through layoffs and bankruptcies. Romney, the wealthiest candidate in the 2008 presidential race, ran Bain Capital from 1984 to 1999, during which time he earned the bulk of his fortune.
Bain Capital specialized in buying companies in distress and revamping them, often by cutting jobs and closing plants. Some of Bain's purchases became more efficient and successful businesses, while others, loaded with debt from Bain's fees, were forced into bankruptcy, costing more jobs.
That same year, the Boston Globereported on a Bain deal involving a firm named Ampad, noting that Bain Capital
slashed jobs at the office supply manufacturer stands in marked contrast to his recent pledges to beleaguered auto workers in Michigan and textile workers in South Carolina to "fight to save every job."
Throughout his 15-year career at Bain Capital, which bought, sold, and merged dozens of companies, Romney had other chances to fight to save jobs, but didn't. His ultimate responsibility was to make money for Bain's investors, former partners said.
Much as he did when running for Massachusetts governor, Romney is now touting his business credentials as he campaigns for president, asserting that he helped create thousands of jobs as CEO of Bain. But a review of Bain's investments during Romney's tenure indicates that job growth was not a particular priority.
When Romney was in the public sector, as governor of Massachusetts, his record on jobs creation was not much better. After he claimed during a GOP primary debate in 2008 that while he was governor, "we kept adding jobs every single month," Factcheck.orgnoted "that's just not true." Moreover, the political fact-vetting site reported:
Romney's job record provides little to boast about. By the end of his four years in office, Massachusetts had squeezed out a net gain in payroll jobs of just 1 percent, compared with job growth of 5.3 percent for the nation as a whole.
Romney's latest ad, an impressionistic powerhouse, cannot be vetted in similar fashion, for it asserts no facts about Romney or his past actions while in the executive suite at Bain or in the state house in Boston. Team Romney is delighted with the spot, believing that this sort of attack will force the Obama crowd to respond by contending that the economy isn't that bad or that things could be worse—assertions that turn off already skeptical and anxious independent voters.
But the video does depict Romney as something that is out of sync with his history: a champion of jobs creation. And this is a claim that can be used by his GOP rivals (when they tire of bashing Romney for enacting a health care insurance mandate in the Bay State). Their oppo research folks can read the above-mentioned stories and formulate the easy criticism: when he had the chance, Romney did not evince concern for the "bumps." A prominent challenge for Romney, the supposed frontrunner, has been authenticity, as he has flip-flopped on critical issues (gay rights, gun rights, abortion) to better position himself to win a GOP contest. Yet as he tries to exploit the issue of jobs, he risks drawing attention to his own past as a corporate bulldozer who rode over bumps in the road on the way to profits. In fact, there's an ad just waiting to be made: real people who lost their jobs, on a desert highway, noting that Romney and Bain stranded them.
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a15e5v
Muslims despised today by GOP; tomorrow,
From Politico
Roger Simon: Muslims despised today; tomorrow, you
Simon says Republican candidates who despise Muslims today may despise you tomorrow.
read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57075.html
Simon says Republican candidates who despise Muslims today may despise you tomorrow.
read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/57075.html
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a15d7o
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
FactCheck GOP NH Debate: Incorrect, Misl
From FactCheck.org:
In the first New Hampshire debate among 2012 presidential hopefuls, we
found a number of incorrect, misleading or shaky factual claims:
Pawlenty was wrong when he boasted that he was "one of the few
governors" to respond to a Bush request to send guardsmen to the
southern border. In fact, all 50 states participated in that border
operation.
Romney claimed that "we didn't raise taxes in Massachusetts" to pay
for his health care law. In fact, his successor imposed a $1-a-pack
tax increase on cigarettes to pay for the new law.
Santorum claimed a Medicare advisory board created by the new federal
health care law will result in a rationing of care for seniors. The
law specifically says the board “shall not include any recommendation
to ration health care.”
Santorum was wrong when he said the Obama administration is "against
any kind of exploration offshore or in Alaska." The administration has
approved 296 new permits for new offshore oil wells since taking
office, and it is considering granting the first permits in Alaska
since 2004.
Bachmann claimed the Congressional Budget Office "has said that
Obamacare will kill 800,000 jobs." That's a distortion. CBO said some
Americans would work less or leave their jobs if they can get health
insurance outside the workplace.
Pawlenty said that "[if] Brazil can have 5 percent growth, then the
United States of America can have 5 percent growth," showing his
economic plan is not unreasonable. But the fact is, World Bank figures
show Brazil has failed to achieve 5 percent growth for 23 of the past
30 years.
Gingrich again tried to rewrite history by claiming that his words
"right-wing social engineering" were "totally taken out of context."
In fact, he called Paul Ryan's plan "too big a jump" and "radical"
change as well.
In the first New Hampshire debate among 2012 presidential hopefuls, we
found a number of incorrect, misleading or shaky factual claims:
Pawlenty was wrong when he boasted that he was "one of the few
governors" to respond to a Bush request to send guardsmen to the
southern border. In fact, all 50 states participated in that border
operation.
Romney claimed that "we didn't raise taxes in Massachusetts" to pay
for his health care law. In fact, his successor imposed a $1-a-pack
tax increase on cigarettes to pay for the new law.
Santorum claimed a Medicare advisory board created by the new federal
health care law will result in a rationing of care for seniors. The
law specifically says the board “shall not include any recommendation
to ration health care.”
Santorum was wrong when he said the Obama administration is "against
any kind of exploration offshore or in Alaska." The administration has
approved 296 new permits for new offshore oil wells since taking
office, and it is considering granting the first permits in Alaska
since 2004.
Bachmann claimed the Congressional Budget Office "has said that
Obamacare will kill 800,000 jobs." That's a distortion. CBO said some
Americans would work less or leave their jobs if they can get health
insurance outside the workplace.
Pawlenty said that "[if] Brazil can have 5 percent growth, then the
United States of America can have 5 percent growth," showing his
economic plan is not unreasonable. But the fact is, World Bank figures
show Brazil has failed to achieve 5 percent growth for 23 of the past
30 years.
Gingrich again tried to rewrite history by claiming that his words
"right-wing social engineering" were "totally taken out of context."
In fact, he called Paul Ryan's plan "too big a jump" and "radical"
change as well.
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a157o7
FactCheck GOP NH Debate: Incorrect, Misl
From FactCheck.org:
In the first New Hampshire debate among 2012 presidential hopefuls, we
found a number of incorrect, misleading or shaky factual claims:
Pawlenty was wrong when he boasted that he was "one of the few
governors" to respond to a Bush request to send guardsmen to the
southern border. In fact, all 50 states participated in that border
operation.
Romney claimed that "we didn't raise taxes in Massachusetts" to pay
for his health care law. In fact, his successor imposed a $1-a-pack
tax increase on cigarettes to pay for the new law.
Santorum claimed a Medicare advisory board created by the new federal
health care law will result in a rationing of care for seniors. The
law specifically says the board “shall not include any recommendation
to ration health care.”
Santorum was wrong when he said the Obama administration is "against
any kind of exploration offshore or in Alaska." The administration has
approved 296 new permits for new offshore oil wells since taking
office, and it is considering granting the first permits in Alaska
since 2004.
Bachmann claimed the Congressional Budget Office "has said that
Obamacare will kill 800,000 jobs." That's a distortion. CBO said some
Americans would work less or leave their jobs if they can get health
insurance outside the workplace.
Pawlenty said that "[if] Brazil can have 5 percent growth, then the
United States of America can have 5 percent growth," showing his
economic plan is not unreasonable. But the fact is, World Bank figures
show Brazil has failed to achieve 5 percent growth for 23 of the past
30 years.
Gingrich again tried to rewrite history by claiming that his words
"right-wing social engineering" were "totally taken out of context."
In fact, he called Paul Ryan's plan "too big a jump" and "radical"
change as well.
In the first New Hampshire debate among 2012 presidential hopefuls, we
found a number of incorrect, misleading or shaky factual claims:
Pawlenty was wrong when he boasted that he was "one of the few
governors" to respond to a Bush request to send guardsmen to the
southern border. In fact, all 50 states participated in that border
operation.
Romney claimed that "we didn't raise taxes in Massachusetts" to pay
for his health care law. In fact, his successor imposed a $1-a-pack
tax increase on cigarettes to pay for the new law.
Santorum claimed a Medicare advisory board created by the new federal
health care law will result in a rationing of care for seniors. The
law specifically says the board “shall not include any recommendation
to ration health care.”
Santorum was wrong when he said the Obama administration is "against
any kind of exploration offshore or in Alaska." The administration has
approved 296 new permits for new offshore oil wells since taking
office, and it is considering granting the first permits in Alaska
since 2004.
Bachmann claimed the Congressional Budget Office "has said that
Obamacare will kill 800,000 jobs." That's a distortion. CBO said some
Americans would work less or leave their jobs if they can get health
insurance outside the workplace.
Pawlenty said that "[if] Brazil can have 5 percent growth, then the
United States of America can have 5 percent growth," showing his
economic plan is not unreasonable. But the fact is, World Bank figures
show Brazil has failed to achieve 5 percent growth for 23 of the past
30 years.
Gingrich again tried to rewrite history by claiming that his words
"right-wing social engineering" were "totally taken out of context."
In fact, he called Paul Ryan's plan "too big a jump" and "radical"
change as well.
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a157na
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)