Mitt Romney Scandals

[Night Strike]

Did you kick any handicapped people on your way to make a lot of money this morning?

And how many people did you pick-pocket today since those evil rich people didn't earn their money and you deserve it more than them?

And you're ignoring the fact that Mitt Romney's life is built on "government handouts." His dad lived on welfare, and Romney took government money for Bain.

How long did his father receive welfare? I can guarantee it wasn't his whole life nor did he build his life on those payments. Furthermore, banking companies pay FDIC insurance, so what are the details behind that $10 million FDIC loan? Did Bain buy out a bank and then use that money to make it solvent again? Did they actually pay back that small sum of money when you compare it to the true bailouts of BILLIONS of dollars that this current government has handed over to their favored companies? For some reason I suspect there is a LOT more true information about this story that you and your Romney-hater friends aren't telling people.

[Juan_Bottom]

How long did his father receive welfare? I can guarantee it wasn't his whole life nor did he build his life on those payments.

He had to build his life on those payments cuz he was a refugee. Scroll up to the very first post on this page. There's also a video of his wife commenting on this page.

Furthermore, banking companies pay FDIC insurance, so what are the details behind that $10 million FDIC loan? Did Bain buy out a bank and then use that money to make it solvent again? Did they actually pay back that small sum of money when you compare it to the true bailouts of BILLIONS of dollars that this current government has handed over to their favored companies? For some reason I suspect there is a LOT more true information about this story that you and your Romney-hater friends aren't telling people.

I don't care that Bain received money. Well, I do, since they have used the money to send American production overseas. So I guess I don't care if legitimate businesses receive money. But that's not the point, the point is that nobody who supports Romney cares that he got a bailout for his business, and even a $77,000 tax rebate for his horse. And who knows what all else? All they care about is ending welfare for the poor. Because it's good for them. In this jobless market, it's good for them. And good for Romney's horse.

He's just a huge hypocrite and his supporters don't care.

[Night Strike]

If you don't like rebates on money that already belonged to that person, then repeal those rebates. And if you oppose sending jobs overseas (which was not done while Romney was at Bain Capital), why do you support Obama? Obama has used taxpayer (not private) money to send billions of dollars to oil companies in Brazil, Columbia, and Mexico and to prop up the European division of GM. If using private money to send jobs overseas is so evil, why isn't using taxpayer money even worse?

[Juan_Bottom]

It's part of the Democratic platform this year, or at least part of Obama's budget plan, to end subsidies to Oil companies. Guess which party's budget includes Oil Subsidies?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/us/po ... .html?_r=1


If you believe in the merits of Capitalism and never compromising, then you'll never accept what the Obama Administration accomplished with the Bailout.

[Night Strike]

It's part of the Democratic platform this year, or at least part of Obama's budget plan, to end subsidies to Oil companies. Guess which party's budget includes Oil Subsidies?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/us/po ... .html?_r=1


If you believe in the merits of Capitalism and never compromising, then you'll never accept what the Obama Administration accomplished with the Bailout.

The only subsidy oil companies get that is unique to their industry is the ethanol mandate/subsidy, the subsidy of which Congress has already repealed. Every other tax break, which is NOT a subsidy, is the same as all other manufacturing plants and businesses are eligible for. So why is the Democratic party singling out a single industry for punishment? How is that treating all people equally (as Democrats are always demanding)?

Furthermore, I wasn't even referring to tax breaks for American companies; I was referring to handing billions of dollars to foreign oil drilling companies that are straight-up payments to them and not just a lowering of the taxes being paid. Obama told Petrobras that we would give them all this money to build oil drilling platforms and then become their "best customer". Why won't he allow US companies to use that money here? Or why won't he even allow US companies to drill on US-owned land/waterway?

And what did the government accomplish with the bailouts? You consider the unilateral rewriting of bankruptcy laws to favor unions over secured lenders to the tune of billions of dollars in taxpayer losses to be a positive accomplishment? What if Bush had ignored the bankruptcy courts in order to secure payments to his favored portions of the bankrupt company? You would have been outraged.

[Juan_Bottom]

You're like, extremely behind on your information.
Obama just opened up millions of acres of public land to Oil hunters, and he is using a new policy to lower the cost of Oil and natural gas by increasing it's flow to market. From now on, if any company sits on their oil or natural gas rights/lease, they'll be forced to auction the rights. It's the new "use it or lose it" promise. It's pretty cool.

As for the rest, this isn't the thread to argue about how dumb your party is and how their definition of "fair" is to give subsidies and tax breaks to industry's who are making record profits during a global recession. Take that to the Democrat thread.

[Juan_Bottom]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/secret-video-romney-private-fundraiser








lolololol oh you

Mitt Romney fails to understand income tax.
Red States on this map have the highest percentage of non-payers.
It's actually the people who don't pay income tax that he hopes will vote for him.



And I'm not kicking the South for not paying income tax. They have the most poor people, and I agree that the poor shouldn't have to pay as much in taxes. But on the flip side, if the Republicans are so awesome at stimulating growth and creating Utopias, then why is their fortress so poor?

[Juan_Bottom]

Romney responds

[BigBallinStalin]

You're like, extremely behind on your information.
Obama just opened up millions of acres of public land to Oil hunters, and he is using a new policy to lower the cost of Oil and natural gas by increasing it's flow to market. From now on, if any company sits on their oil or natural gas rights/lease, they'll be forced to auction the rights. It's the new "use it or lose it" promise. It's pretty cool.

How is creating more uncertainty and other distortions in these markets "pretty cool"?

Maybe you don't understand economics?

Perhaps you're unwilling to be criticized and be open to revision on such issues?

With Phat_Bottom, who knows.

[notyou2]

Did you kick any handicapped people on your way to make a lot of money this morning?

And how many people did you pick-pocket today since those evil rich people didn't earn their money and you deserve it more than them?

None, I make very good honest money and share it willingly with those that need it.

[2dimes]

Interesting, could you define, "need"?

[Nobunaga]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/secret-video-romney-private-fundraiser








lolololol oh you

Mitt Romney fails to understand income tax.
Red States on this map have the highest percentage of non-payers.
It's actually the people who don't pay income tax that he hopes will vote for him.





And I'm not kicking the South for not paying income tax. They have the most poor people, and I agree that the poor shouldn't have to pay as much in taxes. But on the flip side, if the Republicans are so awesome at stimulating growth and creating Utopias, then why is their fortress so poor?

... I don't recall his use of the word, "freeloader". Did I miss it?

...

[notyou2]

Interesting, could you define, "need"?

Hope this helps

need (nd)
n.
1. A condition or situation in which something is required or wanted: crops in need of water; a need for affection.
2. Something required or wanted; a requisite: "Those of us who led the charge for these women's issues ... shared a common vision in the needs of women" (Olympia Snowe).
3. Necessity; obligation: There is no need for you to go.
4. A condition of poverty or misfortune: The family is in dire need.
v. need·ed, need·ing, needs
v.aux.
To be under the necessity of or the obligation to: They need not come.
v.tr.
To have need of; require: The family needs money. See Synonyms at lack.
v.intr.
1. To be in need or want.
2. To be necessary.
[Middle English nede, from Old English nod, nd, distress, necessity.]
Usage Note: Depending on the sense, the verb need behaves sometimes like an auxiliary verb (such as can or may) and sometimes like a main verb (such as want or try). When used as a main verb, need agrees with its subject, takes to before the verb following it, and combines with do in questions, negations, and certain other constructions: He needs to go. Does he need to go so soon? He doesn't need to go. When used as an auxiliary verb, need does not agree with its subject, does not take to before the verb following it, and does not combine with do: He needn't go. Need he go so soon? The auxiliary forms of need are used primarily in present-tense questions, negations, and conditional clauses. Unlike can and may, auxiliary need has no form for the past tense like could and might.
Regional Note: When need is used as the main verb, it can be followed by a present participle, as in The car needs washing, or by to be plus a past participle, as in The car needs to be washed. However, in some areas of the United States, especially western Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio, many speakers omit to be and use just the past participle form, as in The car needs washed. This use of need with past participles is slightly more common in the British Isles, being particularly prevalent in Scotland.

[BigBallinStalin]

So anyone of those, however you arbitrarily decide, is your definition of need?

Excellent!

I have need of your car. SHARE IT!
I am in need or want of your money. SHARE IT!
You are obliged to help those less fortunate than you. GIMME UR MONEY!
I am in a condition in which I want some of your money. SHARE IT NAO!!


There's some problems here, chief.

[notyou2]

The money I make is shared in many ways with all Canadians and other peoples of the world:

taxes...municipal, provincial and federal
unemployment insurance
sales tax at point of purchase
charities
community events and fund raisers

I travel to the states several times a year and spend my money there to help your economy and businesses too

[2dimes]

I need an airplane and fuel.

[notyou2]

I need a pilot.

[2dimes]

I'm available.

[2dimes]

Oh, I need to study and pass a simple test to become current again.

[Juan_Bottom]

Did you kick any handicapped people on your way to make a lot of money this morning?

And how many people did you pick-pocket today since those evil rich people didn't earn their money and you deserve it more than them?

None, I make very good honest money and share it willingly with those that need it.

We've been over this and over this. American productivity has risen. Worker compensation has declined. The money has instead been concentrated at the top. It's a similar concentration to how the wealth was distributed right before the Depression.
Therefore, since the money is no longer in the hands of the producers, the economy has stagnated. You're not "earning" anything when you're just cutting pay to the people who work for you. You're stealing.
If you want America to get better, you have to first accept the truth that the people do need money more than the super wealthy.

[Juan_Bottom]

... I don't recall his use of the word, "freeloader". Did I miss it?

...

Amazing that the only problem that you have here is the use of the word "freeloader."
This whole thread is full of Romney's lies and scandals. Yet your issue is the Liberal use of the word "freeloader." Nice.

[Night Strike]

... I don't recall his use of the word, "freeloader". Did I miss it?

...

Amazing that the only problem that you have here is the use of the word "freeloader."
This whole thread is full of Romney's lies and scandals. Yet your issue is the Liberal use of the word "freeloader." Nice.

Because your scandals are on the level of putting a dog in a carrier on the roof of the car and not scandals of actual policy decisions. Where is your thread on all the scandals of the Obama administration that actually have a direct, negative consequence on this country?

[Juan_Bottom]

You're welcome to make one.


I haven't posted anything about a dog.... What is this dog story that you're talking about???

I did make a post on page 1 about the Romney's illegally doping up a horse with broken legs in order to sell it. There's some real gold in this thread and it's all about Romney's character, not necessarily about bad business decision. For example, I shared the story of how in college Rmoney used to dress as a police officer and pull people over for fun.

[Juan_Bottom]

Also, that also shows something about your character as well. Your candidate is doing all this disquieting stuff and you're defending him too. You shouldn't be defending everything he does all the time. Nor should you ignore the entire scandal just to attack a Liberal just for the use of the word "Freeloader." It's not even groundless use of the word here.

[BigBallinStalin]

Did you kick any handicapped people on your way to make a lot of money this morning?

And how many people did you pick-pocket today since those evil rich people didn't earn their money and you deserve it more than them?

None, I make very good honest money and share it willingly with those that need it.

We've been over this and over this. American productivity has risen. Worker compensation has declined. The money has instead been concentrated at the top. It's a similar concentration to how the wealth was distributed right before the Depression.
Therefore, since the money is no longer in the hands of the producers, the economy has stagnated. You're not "earning" anything when you're just cutting pay to the people who work for you. You're stealing.
If you want America to get better, you have to first accept the truth that the people do need money more than the super wealthy.

You don't understand how wealth is created, but you do have an idealistic plan on the alleged benefits of transferring wealth.