Skip to main content

Mitt Romney
Worse than embarrassing.
While visiting London, perhaps Mitt Romney ought to take a break from proving himself an ass and a buffoon and start paying attention to what is happening in Britain. Besides the Olympics. Alongside the Olympics. He also might want to note that these Olympics were built with government money. Just as the Salt Lake City Olympics he did or did not lead were built with government money.

Outside of the Olympics venues and amidst the celebrations, something else has been happening in Britain, and it provides a direct message about the immediate political and economic future of the United States:

Britain's economic output collapsed by 0.7% in the second quarter of 2012 as the country's double-dip recession extended into a third quarter.

Across-the-board weakness in manufacturing and construction coupled with the loss of output caused by the extra bank holiday to mark the Queen's diamond jubilee were responsible for the setback, according to data from the Office for National Statistics.

Analysts in the City had expected a 0.2% drop in gross domestic product in the three months to June and were stunned by the scale of the fall in activity.

Analysts were stunned. And keep in mind that Britain's double dip had been expected since at least last March, and became official in April. The double dip itself isn't what stunned analysts, it's the just-announced magnitude of it. The worst in more than 50 years. And the political fallout?
(Chancellor of the Exchequer) George Osborne was coming under intense pressure from business, the City and the opposition on Wednesday to rethink his hardline austerity approach after news of a deepening double-dip recession dealt a severe blow to the government's deficit reduction strategy.

The Bank of England is expected to embark on further emergency measures to stimulate growth this autumn following the release of official figures showing a shock 0.7% contraction in economic activity in the three months to June.

And the view from labor:
The (Trades Union Congress) general secretary, Brendan Barber, said: "The UK is on course for a longer depression than the '30s, the tightest squeeze in living standards since the '20s and more than a million young people are currently out of work. The government must abandon self-defeating austerity and prioritise public and private investment in infrastructure and in the futures of our long-term unemployed to get Britain working again."
And the near-term temporary solution:
The UK is expected to emerge from its first double-dip recession since the 1970s in the third quarter, when a combination of the London Olympics and a bounce back from the production losses after the extra June bank holiday will provide a boost to activity.
In other words, the economic stimulus that is government spending on the Olympics is expected to help bounce Britain's economy out of the recession next quarter. But that will be temporary. The real problem is this:
“Austerity is failing,” said Jonathan Portes, director of the National Institute for Economic and Social Research in London. “It’s clear that having a very sharp fiscal consolidation before the recovery had been firmly established was a mistake. We’ve seen a very sharp fall in public-sector investment and most of the deficit cutting has been in investment.”
But the cruel stupidity that is economic austerity has been crushing economies throughout Europe, whose voters made the collective mistake of electing conservative governments at the worst possible time. And that's where we come back to Mitt Romney. And to this November's elections here in the United States. Because Romney embraces the very same type of austerity agenda that has failed with such devastating impact in Europe.

As I wrote last April:

The Republicans will offer a presidential nominee who would have let the auto industry go bankrupt, who thinks unemployment insurance is a disaster, who would cut Medicare and Social Security benefits, and who doesn't even want us to know where else he would cut spending. The Republicans will offer a presidential nominee who will cut benefits on just about everyone who needs them in order to finance tax cuts on corporations and the very wealthy. The Republicans will offer a presidential nominee whose austerity would be as cruel and stupid as that now crushing Europe, but which would benefit the extremely wealthy such as himself.
Romney also embraces the Ryan Budget which would punish low income Americans, and seniors, and women, and students, while decimating health care spending. And even as the Department of Agriculture reported how food stamps reduce poverty, the Republicans want to cut them, too. And even as new data proved that the welfare reform of 16 years ago has resulted in more child poverty, Ryan also wants even more of that.

That Romney in but one day in London once again proved himself an utter ass was most surprising because it had seemed Romney's asininity no longer could be a surprise; but that isn't the most important part of the story. The real story is that while Romney runs around embarrassing himself and infuriating pretty much everyone else, the British economy is in tatters precisely because of the types of economic programs Romney wants to inflict on the United States. Romney most certainly won't shut up for once and pay attention to the lives of others, because he's always been completely self-absorbed and narcissistic, and he's never demonstrated the least concern for the lives of others. But we the American voters should pay attention. Because as shocking as it is, Romney's feckless foolishness is but a sideshow. The spotlight should be on the collapse of the British economy, and how a Romney presidency would import some recent Anglo-Saxon heritage that everyone should understand and no one should want to suffer.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Boston Globe quotes a British economist today (21+ / 0-)

    speculating there may even be a triple-dip recession:

    “There is a latent danger with issues like the top rate of tax, which the opposition can exploit to make it resonate with their backgrounds,” said Simon Baulner, a professor of politics at the University of Sheffield. “This will continue to be an issue while there’s not fair weather, particularly if the economy stagnates or we enter a triple-dip recession.”
    The specific context there was the Tory cut to the 50% rate paid by the highest earners.  Kinda like the Bush tax cuts here...

    Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free
    ¡Boycott Arizona!

    by litho on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:11:23 PM PDT

  •  And yes the Right continues to pretend that (16+ / 0-)

    nothing happened before WWII

    They keep blabbing about how fast we recovered from recessions since WWII completely ignoring how long it took to recover from the great depression (7-9 years GDP,10-12 full employment) and the Austerity measures of 1937 damaging the depression recovery.

    Not blaming Bush for the mess we're in, is like not blaming a train engineer for a fatal train wreck because he's no longer driving the train.

    by JML9999 on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:12:03 PM PDT

    •  After the 1937 austerity, I think it was the war (7+ / 0-)

      itself that really brought the Depression to an end.
      Massive government spending and job creation, building weapons of war.

      Everybody got to elevate from the norm....

      by Icicle68 on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:24:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Starting with lend lease law 1Q 1941 (9+ / 0-)

        Which the GOP fought against

        Opposition to the Lend-Lease bill was strongest among isolationist Republicans in Congress, who feared that the measure would be "the longest single step this nation has yet taken toward direct involvement in the war abroad." When the House of Representatives finally took a roll call vote on February 9, 1941, the 260 to 165 vote fell largely along party lines. Democrats voted 238 to 25 in favor and Republicans 24 in favor and 135 against.[10]

        The vote in the Senate, which took place a month later, revealed a similar partisan divide. 49 Democrats (79 percent) voted "aye" with only 13 Democrats (21 percent) voting "nay." In contrast, 17 Republicans (63 percent) voted "nay" while 10 Senate Republicans (37 percent) sided with the Democrats to pass the bill.[11]

        President Roosevelt signed the Lend-Lease bill into law on 11 March 1941. It permitted him to "sell, transfer title to, exchange, lease, lend, or otherwise dispose of, to any such government [whose defense the President deems vital to the defense of the United States] any defense article." In April, this policy was extended to China,[12] and in October to the Soviet Union. Roosevelt approved US $1 billion in Lend-Lease aid to Britain at the end of October 1941.

        Not blaming Bush for the mess we're in, is like not blaming a train engineer for a fatal train wreck because he's no longer driving the train.

        by JML9999 on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:30:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Of course they damaged the recovery (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      If you are living on your American Express card and running up ever more debt every month, your living standard is (temporarily) higher than it would be if you lived within your means.

      Living within your means is always more painful than profligately running up debt, which is why irresponsible diaries demanding ever more debt are very popular around here.

      We need to figure out how to run the US economy at parity or a slight surplus or else disaster will eventually occur.

      (-5.50,-6.67): Left Libertarian
      Leadership doesn't mean taking a straw poll and then just throwing up your hands. -Jyrinx

      by Sparhawk on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 02:07:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And there it comes... false comparison of a govt (6+ / 0-)

        to an individual's personal finances.


        The boom, not the slump, is the right time for austerity.” So declared John Maynard Keynes 75 years ago, and he was right. Even if you have a long-run deficit problem — and who doesn’t? — slashing spending while the economy is deeply depressed is a self-defeating strategy, because it just deepens the depression.


        The bad metaphor — which you’ve surely heard many times — equates the debt problems of a national economy with the debt problems of an individual family. A family that has run up too much debt, the story goes, must tighten its belt. So if Britain, as a whole, has run up too much debt — which it has, although it’s mostly private rather than public debt — shouldn’t it do the same? What’s wrong with this comparison?

        The answer is that an economy is not like an indebted family. Our debt is mostly money we owe to each other; even more important, our income mostly comes from selling things to each other. Your spending is my income, and my spending is your income.

        So what happens if everyone simultaneously slashes spending in an attempt to pay down debt? The answer is that everyone’s income falls — my income falls because you’re spending less, and your income falls because I’m spending less. And, as our incomes plunge, our debt problem gets worse, not better.

        In my honor he pulled out old forgotten dignity and walked straight in a crooked world. ~~poetry of young Barack Obama

        by bronte17 on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 03:39:03 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Mitt Made Himself The Story..... (9+ / 0-)

    Once again he failed to capitalize on the bounty that was before him.  Not only did he fail to bond w/ the Brits as a former Head of an Olympic event, he appeared diminished & mean spirited as he pointed out they could fail.

    He had the perfect opportunity to appear economically savvy, but instead he blundered his way thru a pissing contest w/ the Brits.  My Olympics was better than yours, just ask me.

    Now he's proclaiming Jerusalem the capital of Israel.  Could Mitt possibly be any more contentious?

    I tremble at the thought of the guy in Poland.  

    •  Embarrased as he offers the traditional Polish (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      annieli, Friend of the court, eps62


      Yuck She mush pun.

      Not blaming Bush for the mess we're in, is like not blaming a train engineer for a fatal train wreck because he's no longer driving the train.

      by JML9999 on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:19:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  maybe he has a few Polish jokes to show what a (0+ / 0-)

      fun lovin' prankster kind of guy he is in private.

      •  One Of His Sons Told The Story Of Surprising..... (4+ / 0-)

        Mitt in a darkened basement.  Mitt wrestled him down to the ground saying "Was it worth it, was it worth it"?

        Maybe Mitt will wrestle somebody in Poland.  Newsweek must be on his hit list now after they asked if he was a wimp.  He simply has to flex his muscle in Poland before he gets home to show he's no wimp, especially since Netanyahu is leading him around by his earlobes.  Heal, Mitt, heal.  


        •  I hadn't heard of this (0+ / 0-)

          Do you have a link for this story?

          Not that I don't believe this -- I can believe Romney has such a shriveled soul he would do something like that to his own flesh & blood (& this may explain why they are so tepid in supporting his run for office) -- but this story illuminates that repulsive side of Romney in a way almost too good to be true.

          And having a link to the story makes it easier to push into the general population, to show voters that if you vote for Romney, you're voting for a heartless bully who would eagerly beat up every American just because he can.

  •  Bravo, Laurence. (6+ / 0-)

    Great job making this connection.

    Romney's little jaunt to England is bringing all sorts of things into focus.

    Art is the handmaid of human good.

    by joe from Lowell on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:19:33 PM PDT

  •  Mitt, Tory wannabee - we kicked them out in 18 C. (3+ / 0-)

    Präsidentenelf-maßschach"Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) "Ensanguining the skies...Falls the remorseful day".政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

    by annieli on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:19:44 PM PDT

  •  Let's hear it for the Rainbow Tour... (0+ / 0-)

    It's been an incredible success.

    "Above and beyond the question of how to grow the economy there is a legitimate concern about how to grow the quality of our lives." -- Paul Wellstone

    by idlemoments on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:24:15 PM PDT

  •  I absolutely HATE the race stuff (0+ / 0-)

    I'm an older white guy and I have ALWAYS wondered why it's such a problem when someone white says anything about their white heritage gets grief when non-whites can say anything and everything about their non-white heritage.  I'm talking politically here, of course.  I mean, sometimes, I think I should not say I'm white on a blogsite lest I get bashed and trashed for not "understanding" just so many things.

    Okay, so Romney is white.  And, okay, Obama is half-black.  What's the big deal, guys?  It's almost like race should be considered when voting for your president.  I'm sure that's not what people think we?

    The truth is sometimes very inconvenient.

    by commonsensically on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:31:03 PM PDT

    •  Your heritage is not "white." (8+ / 0-)

      Go ahead and talk about your German/Italian/Scottish/Polish/Irish/whatever heritage all you want.  Talk about your American heritage if that's what you feel.  I've got a Celtic knot tattooed on my shoulder and nobody has ever given me a problem about it.

      But there is no such thing as "white heritage."  That is a fictional concept invented by racists.

      Art is the handmaid of human good.

      by joe from Lowell on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:42:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Really? (0+ / 0-)

        Then we should just do away with St. Patty's day?  

        And, so, if you're saying there's no such thing as white heritage, then you believe there's no such thing as black heritage?

        Not exactly sure where you're going with this.  

        The truth is sometimes very inconvenient.

        by commonsensically on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:51:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What Does St. Paddy's Day Have to Do With White (4+ / 0-)

          heritage? It's Irish heritage.

          We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

          by Gooserock on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 02:24:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I just said exactly the opposite of that. (2+ / 0-)

          In the very comment you replied to, I endorsed celebrating Irish heritage, or whatever one's actual heritage might be.  I pointed that out as something entirely distinct from the bogus, invented, phony political construct called "white heritage."

          St. Patrick's Day has nothing whatsoever to do with the concept of "White heritage."  It's a iconic part of Irish heritage, a non-made up, not racist, genuine ethnic and cultural background for people to celebrate.

          They are two entirely different things - the actual heritage that people can trace back through Ellis Island (or wherever) and their particular "old country," vs. the fake concept of "white heritage."

          Art is the handmaid of human good.

          by joe from Lowell on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 05:55:27 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  and? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Going the Distance, eps62

      I agree that everyone should be proud of who they are, but that's not the same as openly saying that Romney should be president because he's more Anglo-Saxon than Obama.

      Medic Alert: Do not resuscitate under a Republican administration.

      by happymisanthropy on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:50:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Stuff gets said about our "white" heritage a lot (0+ / 0-)

      It's called history, literature, & Classical music -- & a whole lot of other things. Because the "white" heritage is the dominant culture, it's easy for us who are not "non-white" to think we are being ignored. (And if a person is a disenfranchised person of European origins who is not well educated, that person will think "white" heritage is being discriminated against.)

      This "Anglo-Saxon" heritage that Romney talked about, though, contains a fair amount of hot air: the US fought two separate wars with the UK, for crissakes, & as late at the 1930s the mayor of Chicago could raise his popularity by making anti-British statements. (He threatened to punch the nose of one of the Royals if the man ever visited Chicago, despite the fact he had never met the Royal nor did the man ever express an interest in visiting Chicago.)

      And I say that as someone who has a personal connection to the UK: my father's family were dirt farmers in the Midlands who emigrated to the US in the later 19th century. (And sometimes I find myself expressing a very British sense of humor.)

  •  Digby points out what's behind Austerity (9+ / 0-)

    It's a morality play; the economy is in trouble because too many people are getting free stuff from the government, or something.

    Only the imposition of virtuous behavior (austerity) will restore the universe to its rightful balance. It has nothing to do with stupidity on the part of rich and powerful elites; they are rich and powerful because they're smart and work harder than everyone else. They deserve what they have.

    These folks are all too willing to chalk up foreclosed mortgages and lost jobs to "bad luck" and have no problem shrugging their shoulders at those who have the misfortune of getting sick without health insurance and thinking "those are the breaks." But when it comes to the other side of that coin, the side that makes people vastly wealthy with one (or many) good breaks, we are required to believe that it's all a matter of hard work and talent that got them there.
    And that's why they're so opposed to the government taking an active role to turn things around. It's an admission that luck and rigging the system has so much to do with their 'success' - and they can't deal with that.

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 01:45:36 PM PDT

    •  Great point, austerity is seen as "good medicine" (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The whole budget mess gets wrapped in so many metaphors and euphemisms.  If I hear "austerity diet" one more time, I'm gonna puke.  It's as if debt is synonymous with gluttony and laziness while cutting social programs and support for poor people is synonymous with improving their moral fiber.  Never mind the complete moral hypocrisy in our current tax code which rewards the investor class that basically gets paid to gamble.

  •  The Real Story Is the Economy (1+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Hidden by:
    Unit Zero

    "The embarrassments are the sideshow, the real story is the economy"

    And I'm afraid that this is a point that the liberal media doesn't get, or doesn't want to get.  Where I live, the NBC and CBS evening news shows are on opposite local news.  When the national shows get going on Romney and his "gaffes," I punch the button to go to the local news.  I don't care about Romney and his "boners," but I sure as heck DO care about the economy and what is being done about it, if anything.  I keep waiting to hear something like "Hello, I'm Barak Obama, and here is my vision for my next term."  Instead, I get, "Hello, I'm Barak Obama, and Mitt Romney is a crook and a liar!"  Enough is enough.  Obama is going to have to give me a good rationale for voting for him, because right now, I am definitely planning to vote for Romney.

    •  And what is your "good rationale" in voting (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eps62, Laurence Lewis, Lost and Found

      for romney?

      "I smoke. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your fuckin' mouth." --- Bill Hicks

      by voroki on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 02:17:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'm with you on this. You know this time (0+ / 0-)

      last year when the Obama campaign was all 'Its the Deficit' kos called them out and said, hey, its not working.

      Even though he's doing good in battleground states v national polls, its not over til its over.

      Even Obama's friend Bernie Sanders is asking  for some evidence of where he stands as well.

      Sanders wants Obama to explain position on Social Security

      How did Supreme Court decision ACA help the 23 million still uncovered? Ask the 18,000 Doctors of PNHP -- they're not waiting, FORWARD now to pass H.R. 676, the “Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act .

      by divineorder on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 02:17:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  You Will Vote for Romney, Which is At Least Honest (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lost and Found

      but this is a forum chartered by the owner for electing Democrats so you're in the wrong place.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 02:25:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree, but the commenter has a point, too, and (0+ / 0-)

        it's one that Obama needs to pay heed to if he wants to get reelected. (I'm hearing the same thing from people who voted for Obama in 2008)

        What we're doing isn't working and these people ask me why they should vote for four more years of things getting worse.

        Obama now stands for the status quo and a vote for him in their minds is a vote for the same old same old. (and Romney is positioning himself as the agent of change, just as Clinton did in1992)

        Obama needs to tell people in no uncertain terms what he plans to do differently to turn things around. He needs to come up with a bold, new plan, to create jobs and stimulate the economy.

        People want change and he needs to explain how he plans to deliver it. (And like Truman he can run against a do-nothing Congress and say if you want real change, if you want my bold new program, then you must reelect me and give me a Democratic Congress.

        He has yet to seal the deal with the American people and give them hope that things will get better and explain to them he has a plan to accomplish this.

        Otherwise, in their minds, a vote for Obama is a vote for the very unpleasant status quo and they want change.

        •  Been napping? (0+ / 0-)

          Right now Congress is in the middle of a fight on the Bush Tax Cuts. The GOP is trying to make them permanent. President Obama is closing in on his 2008 promise to extend them only for the middle and working classes.

          This is part and parcel of President Obama's economic reforms and it is not a small matter. It is also aprefect example of GOP obstruction to every one of President Obama's initiatives.

          So you have your cart before your horse. The plans are already out there. The November election is Tea Party Remover. After President Obama's re-election he will claim a mandate and long-opposed reforms will finally pass.

          The plans are out there. they have been out there. One American political party continues to claim "there is no plan". One political party keeps harping that nothing President Obama has done is working. But  voters in the other political party disagree.

    •  Yep, it's that corporate owned, tailored for (0+ / 0-)

      America, liberal media that causes most of this.

      -- We are just regular people informed on issues

      by mike101 on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 02:29:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  This statement by you (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lost and Found, MA Liberal
      And I'm afraid that this is a point that the liberal media doesn't get
      just shows that you are not, nor have you ever been a Democrat. You, sir, are a

      If you play Microsoft CD's backwards, you hear satanic things, but that's nothing, because if you play them forwards, they install Windows.

      by Unit Zero on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 02:05:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  i don't know (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    earthling1, eps62

    about europe but the history of the us is that times get better under dem admin and down under gop admin, when times are good  as in the clinton admin voters go and focus on their social concerns because their pocketbook worries are forgotten so they want change, was 2000 good change, they always let prejudice get in the way when their bellies are full.

    now we have a gop house and senators that are blocking any legislation from happening that might help the economy, will the voters make the guilty pay, probably not, and if they elect romney the shit will really hit the fan and the voters (wisc) will again be crying that we need help please save us from ourselves, until things are better and we can again act like biased spoiled brats.

  •  Romney is an F-ing arsehole (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    The Brits probably are glad he is gone.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Rianne Eisler

    by noofsh on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 02:13:35 PM PDT

  •  Romney is Foreign (7+ / 0-)

    The way in which Romney cavalierly outsourced jobs overseas, and the tens of millions of dollars that he shelters from US taxes, from Ireland to Switzerland to Bermuda to the Cayman Islands to heaven knows where else is Exhibit A showing that Romney has no allegiance to America and no sense of patriotic solidarity with fellow Americans.

    Romney doesn't share a common purpose with most Americans. He doesn't even believe in such things as common purpose. He rails against the very government that has provided the foundation and structure for him to accumulate his massive wealth, and he condemns the very notion of shared sacrifice even though he has gained considerab­ly from the shared sacrifice of others.

    Romney doesn't consider what the ramifications and consequences of closing entire factories and outsourcing jobs overseas might have on states, communities, and inidividual lives. And it doesn't even dawn on him what adverse effects might occur to the country by sheltering tax dollars overseas and assisting foreign corporations to avoid paying US taxes.

    Romney and his campaign have attempted to paint President Obama and his policies as "foreign," but it is Romney and his actions that are foreign to most Americans.

  •  I don't trust Romney I don't trust Romney (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eps62, Matt Z

    Romney walks like he is holding back a pantsload.

    But then it comes out his mouth.

    I don't trust Romney.  

    I don't trust Romney.

  •  Obama & the Economy (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eps62, weinerschnauzer

    The notion that the state of the economy should translate into defeat for President Obama in November is complete nonsense.  This political media narrative requires voters to erase all memory of the policies of the previous administration and to forget where the country and the economy was on January 20, 2009.  It also requires voters to ignore the fact that we have a Republican Congress that has adopted the cynical political strategy of obstruction and the purposeful destruction of the economy designed around the sinister notion of making a democratically elected president of the United States a one-term president.

  •  Romney=Amoral (0+ / 0-)
  •  Romney's Olympic ad (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eps62, Matt Z

    I just saw my first RNC ad on Romney's behalf. It shows Obama saying the stimulus will provide 3 to 4 million jobs. Then is shows a series of depressed looking mainly white people. And it says sourly, now he wants another stimulus.


    The other trouble with the ad is its condescending, sentimentalizing attitude toward displaced workers. You can almost see the RNC smirking behind their hands at these poor sad sacks.

  •  hes shaking that etch-a-sketch again (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eps62, Laurence Lewis, Matt Z

    Id rather be a tax and spend democrat than a borrow and spend republican any day. I pay my bills. - me

    by AustinLiberal on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 04:43:57 PM PDT

  •  this is why a 3+ party system is so frightening.. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eps62, Laurence Lewis

    this is not what many who voted for the Lib Dems had in mind.  This has been a disaster for the UK.  Thanks Lawrence

    Macca's Meatless Monday

    by VL Baker on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 04:46:02 PM PDT

    •  heh (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      beach babe in fl

      i like multi-party systems, it's just that the lib dems sold their souls- and destroyed their future- for a small taste of power.

      The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

      by Laurence Lewis on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 05:45:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  more parties more chances to sell out...very (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Laurence Lewis

        risky.  power & money too enticing.

        Macca's Meatless Monday

        by VL Baker on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 05:04:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  well... (0+ / 0-)

          i would get money out altogether. but with a multi-party system, the democrats would be forced to form coalitions with liberal parties, such as the greens. which means the democrats would be forced to stop moving ever rightward and start respecting their liberal base.

          The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

          by Laurence Lewis on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 10:06:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  i think the repubs have found a better way... (0+ / 0-)

            their extreme base has taken over the party yet the party still maintains some identity.  And they still have the over arching organization to simplify funding, outreach etc.  i'm willing to be convinced but it seems that more parties would fragment the message and give a risk for an unmajority rule.

            I've seem such horrible results from 3+ party elections that influence my op.   The 2010 senate election in FL seems to have set up Rubio to be the next saviour..all because Crist couldn't decide where he belongs.  Rubio could be incredibly dangerous yet 2/3 of the vote was for moderation.  

            I hate the compromise too but i think that's what you have in a democracy.

            Can't beliieve i said the repubs have a better anything

            And yes, if we could get the money out that would change the equation

            Macca's Meatless Monday

            by VL Baker on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 12:43:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  as presently constituted (0+ / 0-)

              multi-party doesn't work, because almost always the third party can only be a spoiler. which is part of why i prefer a parliamentary system, to begin with.

              the repubs have the advantage because of money. that's really it. traditionally, they also had organizational and strategic advantages, because democrats have had a remarkable talent for blowing winnable elections. but the repubs also have the advantage because (other than romney) they tend to stick to their narrative. democrats fumble and flop around and people often don't know what they really stand for.

              the bottom line is that the public is to the left of both parties on a host of issues, and demographics are going to be an increasing problem for the republicans, while money and voter suppression will remain their only hope. but if we had a parliamentary type system with legitimate campaign finance regulations the republicans would disintegrate into several acrimonious parties while the democrats would split into 2 or 3, with less ideological acrimony, and the overall coalition being forced back to its populist roots.

              The cold passion for truth hunts in no pack. -Robinson Jeffers

              by Laurence Lewis on Mon Jul 30, 2012 at 12:59:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  More Romney out of touch syndrome: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    From an interview with ABC:

    "JERUSALEM – Mitt Romney could not say today whether he had ever paid a tax rate lower than 13.9 percent, saying he would have to “go back and check.”

    In an exclusive interview with ABC News’ David Muir to air tonight on World News, Romney was asked if there has ever been a year when he paid less than 13.9 percent, the rate he paid in 2010.

    Transcript of Mitt Romney’s Interview With ABC News

    “I haven’t calculated that,” said Romney. “I’m happy to go back and look, but my view is I’ve paid all the taxes required by law.”

    “From time to time I’ve been audited as it happens, I think, to other citizens as well, and the accounting firm which prepares my taxes has done a very thorough and complete job pay taxes as legally due,” said Romney. “I don’t pay more than are legally due.”

    I'm now inclined to think that Newt, Santorum, even Nein, nein, nein could have made better presidential candidates. (Okay, maybe not Herman).

    "A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading. There are traps everywhere ". C. S. Lewis

    by TofG on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 07:03:37 PM PDT

  •  I think we'll have it even worse than GB.... (0+ / 0-)

    Their social safety net was 10 times what ours is currently. When ours gets cut, seems like it will be considerably more dangerous, and harmful to the 100's of millions of Americans who depend on it in all it's different forms.

    Corporations before people.... it's the American way!

    by Lucy2009 on Sun Jul 29, 2012 at 07:29:31 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site