It's odd that these voter fraud problems only seem to exist in swing states though!
US Presidential Election: Tuesday November 6th, 2012
- Thread starter Team Brian GB
- Start date
- Status
This black vote argument is a dismissive one typically employed by anti-Obama people who just can't accept that a black man gets voted in on his policies, rather than his colour or 'superstardom'. I'm surprised mjs made the point since he's not a fanatical right-winger.
If somebody can give me a good argument as to why blacks should have chosen McCain over Obama then maybe the argument has merit. I don't think they can.
This explains fairly simply an obvious Republikan strategy
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ainst-voters/2012/07/09/gJQAopcCZW_story.html
The GOP’s crime against voters
By Eugene Robinson, Washington Post, July 9
Spare us any more hooey about “preventing fraud” and “protecting the integrity of the ballot box.” The Republican-led crusade for voter ID laws has been revealed as a cynical ploy to disenfranchise as many likely Democratic voters as possible, with poor people and minorities the main targets.
Recent developments in Pennsylvania — one of more than a dozen states where voting rights are under siege — should be enough to erase any lingering doubt: The GOP is trying to pull off an unconscionable crime . . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...ainst-voters/2012/07/09/gJQAopcCZW_story.html
The GOP’s crime against voters
By Eugene Robinson, Washington Post, July 9
Spare us any more hooey about “preventing fraud” and “protecting the integrity of the ballot box.” The Republican-led crusade for voter ID laws has been revealed as a cynical ploy to disenfranchise as many likely Democratic voters as possible, with poor people and minorities the main targets.
Recent developments in Pennsylvania — one of more than a dozen states where voting rights are under siege — should be enough to erase any lingering doubt: The GOP is trying to pull off an unconscionable crime . . .
I believe none of these laws have yet to be decided in court as to their legality yet.
Though the Florida voter purge has been stopped.
The Pennsylvania law is being heard on July 25. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Though the Florida voter purge has been stopped.
The Pennsylvania law is being heard on July 25. It will be interesting to see what happens.
What is it exactly that has brought the US Right to this pitch of desperation? I mean not just this voter ID stuff, but also the general rejection of the norms of political process. It can't just be having a black President that's done it... it feels like a kind of apocalyptic panic.
Then again, maybe it's not as unusual as I think. There's been plenty of obstructing black voting before. And there was Bush v. Gore. Plus they did impeach the last Democratic President.
Then again, maybe it's not as unusual as I think. There's been plenty of obstructing black voting before. And there was Bush v. Gore. Plus they did impeach the last Democratic President.
These are the last desperate acts of a group of people who see 'their way of life' disappearing in front of their eyes.
They will fail.
I'd enjoy making 250k per year and my family members would be saying how that's a lot of money (and they're all GOP voters).
That way of life has been gone for decades now and it 'ain't coming back. How long has it been since a family of four could live on the single income of a father in a decent union job and have two weeks holiday a year, cheap cars, gas and food, good education and a fair chance at a cheap college education for the kids, and affordable housing in good neighbourhoods?
These days we're all working harder for less money, less vacation and the kids go to shitty schools and get saddled with lifetime college debts for jobs that don't exist while the price of everything has increased way out of line with the increase in wages. Schools, libraries, police departments, and other public services are all woefully underfunded and serve their constituencies less and less in favour of being self-serving.
But it's all the fault of some treasonous black dude who got lucky because he had a slogan and good ad campaign...yeah right.
That's the line Jonathan Chait takes.
I wonder also if, at least among GOP elites, the Supreme Court isn't the major factor. Obama's already been able to add Sotomayor and Kagan (not that she's all that liberal, but still). Ginsburg's 79 and ill, Breyer's 73 - in a second term Obama could shore up one or both of those places, and might even get to replace a conservative justice.
I think that's everything to them and this Roberts ruling on ACA has been a massive shock to them. If Obama can get two more in then we might see Citizens United overturned too.
Christ, just thinking about ******* Miers gives me chills. We really were that close to her being confirmed.
If Obama wins again, the Supreme Court will be more 'reasonable'. I don't have an issue with a conservative judge as long as he or she is fair and upholds the constitution. The judges that voted against the ACA simply tried to overturn the will of the people. What don' they get.
Kagan while a bit conservative will prove to be a good judge. I still have some hope for Roberts.
As for their 'way of life' disappearing...it is simply fear of people of different cultures. Once they get to understand different peoples, they will realise we are all in this together.
Did you read Clarence's 2 page opinion? I bet that took him a week to write.
We need to read/listen again to Obama's Race Speech. It really addresses these attitudes. Politicians playing on the fears of people is not new. It is always about finding a scapegoat. The Nazi's did. Here in the States it is the blacks and Hispanics.
The blacks, the hispanics, the teachers the nurses, the police, the firefighters, unions, poor people...feck me the list is endless.
I have zero respect for Clarence Thomas. he is the perfect example of a black person who is willing to sell out his own kind to serve the will of a group that oppresses his own kind. Despicable man. Add every black politician like West to that.
I have more respect for Scalia. At least he shows himself to be a total right wing hater.
I will be toasting his replacement.
Eric Holder: Voter ID Laws Are 'Poll Taxes'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/10/eric-holder-voter-id-poll-tax_n_1662847.html
HOUSTON -- Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday he opposes a new photo ID requirement in Texas elections because it would be harmful to minority voters.
In remarks to the NAACP in Houston, the attorney general said the Justice Department "will not allow political pretexts to disenfranchise American citizens of their most precious right."
Under the law passed in Texas, Holder said that "many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them – and some would struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them."
"We call those poll taxes," Holder added spontaneously, drawing applause as he moved away from the original text of his speech with a reference to a fee used in some Southern states after slavery's abolition to disenfranchise black people.
The 24th amendment to the constitution made that type of tax illegal.
Holder spoke a day after a trial started in federal court in Washington over the 2011 law passed by Texas' GOP-dominated Legislature that requires voters to show photo identification when they get to the polls.
Under Texas' law, Holder noted, a concealed handgun license would serve as acceptable ID to vote, but a student ID would not. He went on to say that while only 8 percent of white people do not have government-issued photo IDs, about 25 percent of black people lack such identification.
"I don't know what will happen as this case moves forward, but I can assure you that the Justice Department's efforts to uphold and enforce voting rights will remain aggressive," the attorney general said.
Holder said the arc of American history has always moved toward expanding the electorate and that "we will simply not allow this era to be the beginning of the reversal of that historic progress."
"I will not allow that to happen," he added.
The attorney general spoke at the 103rd convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which is launching a battle against new state voter ID laws. NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous has likened the fight against conservative-backed voter ID laws passed in several states to "Selma and Montgomery times," referring to historic Alabama civil rights confrontations of the mid-1960s.
Holder, the first black man named U.S. Attorney General, was received with resounding applause, a standing ovation and chants of "Holder, Holder, Holder" at the convention.
Those chants quickly changed to "stand your ground, stand your ground," a reference to a Florida law that neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman is using to defend fatally shooting Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager he encountered while patrolling his community in February. Police did not initially arrest or charge Zimmerman, saying the "stand your ground" law allowed self-defense. He was later charged with second-degree murder.
Holder said the Justice Department under his leadership has taken unprecedented steps to study and prevent violence against youth and address the high homicide rate among young black men.
Finally, the attorney general noted with pride that the U.S. Supreme Court in two recent rulings regarding President Barack Obama's health care law and immigration laws passed in Arizona, largely supported the federal government and the Department of Justice. However, he said, he remained concerned that Arizona law enforcement, under the portion of the law upheld by the court, would be able to check the immigration status of any person suspected of being in the United States illegally.
"No American should ever live under a cloud of suspicion just because of what they look like," Holder said.
Big Fail..the GOP with their contempt vote.
I want to see how many of these voter ID laws stand.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/10/eric-holder-voter-id-poll-tax_n_1662847.html
HOUSTON -- Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday he opposes a new photo ID requirement in Texas elections because it would be harmful to minority voters.
In remarks to the NAACP in Houston, the attorney general said the Justice Department "will not allow political pretexts to disenfranchise American citizens of their most precious right."
Under the law passed in Texas, Holder said that "many of those without IDs would have to travel great distances to get them – and some would struggle to pay for the documents they might need to obtain them."
"We call those poll taxes," Holder added spontaneously, drawing applause as he moved away from the original text of his speech with a reference to a fee used in some Southern states after slavery's abolition to disenfranchise black people.
The 24th amendment to the constitution made that type of tax illegal.
Holder spoke a day after a trial started in federal court in Washington over the 2011 law passed by Texas' GOP-dominated Legislature that requires voters to show photo identification when they get to the polls.
Under Texas' law, Holder noted, a concealed handgun license would serve as acceptable ID to vote, but a student ID would not. He went on to say that while only 8 percent of white people do not have government-issued photo IDs, about 25 percent of black people lack such identification.
"I don't know what will happen as this case moves forward, but I can assure you that the Justice Department's efforts to uphold and enforce voting rights will remain aggressive," the attorney general said.
Holder said the arc of American history has always moved toward expanding the electorate and that "we will simply not allow this era to be the beginning of the reversal of that historic progress."
"I will not allow that to happen," he added.
The attorney general spoke at the 103rd convention of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, which is launching a battle against new state voter ID laws. NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous has likened the fight against conservative-backed voter ID laws passed in several states to "Selma and Montgomery times," referring to historic Alabama civil rights confrontations of the mid-1960s.
Holder, the first black man named U.S. Attorney General, was received with resounding applause, a standing ovation and chants of "Holder, Holder, Holder" at the convention.
Those chants quickly changed to "stand your ground, stand your ground," a reference to a Florida law that neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman is using to defend fatally shooting Trayvon Martin, an unarmed black teenager he encountered while patrolling his community in February. Police did not initially arrest or charge Zimmerman, saying the "stand your ground" law allowed self-defense. He was later charged with second-degree murder.
Holder said the Justice Department under his leadership has taken unprecedented steps to study and prevent violence against youth and address the high homicide rate among young black men.
Finally, the attorney general noted with pride that the U.S. Supreme Court in two recent rulings regarding President Barack Obama's health care law and immigration laws passed in Arizona, largely supported the federal government and the Department of Justice. However, he said, he remained concerned that Arizona law enforcement, under the portion of the law upheld by the court, would be able to check the immigration status of any person suspected of being in the United States illegally.
"No American should ever live under a cloud of suspicion just because of what they look like," Holder said.
Big Fail..the GOP with their contempt vote.
I want to see how many of these voter ID laws stand.
Romney appealing to the black vote!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/11/mitt-romney-booed_n_1664900.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/11/mitt-romney-booed_n_1664900.html
should be a hoot.
EDIT:
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/mitt-romney-booed-naacp.php?ref=fpa
NAACP Crowd Boos Romney’s Promise To Repeal ‘Obamacare’
This was never going to be anything but a trainwreck for Hildegard "Mittens" Von Horsington Romney III.
Liked that comment
He just can't cope when it goes off script. He's not a natural with a crowd. That's important these days and will come across in the debates, I'm sure. That shit-eating grin when he thinks he's landed a zinger is hilarious.
Bet he gets nervous when he sees black people.....probably does not see many in 'his world'..
Ah well he could apply just to be President of white people.
Ah well he could apply just to be President of white people.
he is like a ready made microwavable packaged all in one presidental candidate. I swear to god you can almost see an RC aerial peaking out from his head.Romney won't be one bit miffed at being booed by the NAACP, in fact I wouldn't be surprised if that wasn't the plan.
he is as fake a candidate as I have ever seen.
Thats why I could not believe they picked this clown.
...and these off shore accounts...Do you remember any Presidential candidates that had these...and ran for the office?
He transfered an account to his wife's name before being inaugerated as Givernor apparently...think this is the Bermuda one they are talking about.
In all fairness he got a decent reception at the NAACP. It was just his mentioning repealing Obamacare that was received badly.
Didn't he say he doesn't even know how much money he has?
He reminds me of when Bush snr went to the supermarket to show how ordinary he was and ended up being fascinated by the barcode scanner because he'd never seen one before.
You know what though, Bush got reelected despite being a draft dodger at a time when the war in Iraq was the #1 issue. This despite running against a Vietnam Vet for god sake. The right wing machine will find a way to spin this off shore accounts thing so it seems acceptable.
The main reason the Obama campaign is bringing up Romney's offshore accounts is not because they think he has not paid the taxes on them but where he derived his income from. This is a good post I saw.
"The most telling aspect of the Swiss bank and Cayman Islands accounts is how astoundingly out-of-touch it makes Mitt appear to be that he did not get rid of these foreign accounts when he has known for years he was going to run for President. The question is not whether Mitt is avoiding taxes, but what is Mitt hiding from operation of public political disclosure laws?
The only conclusion one can draw is that whatever Mitt is hiding is even more politically damaging than the mere fact of ownership in these accounts, which is bad enough. Is he hiding businesses that have converted high paying jobs for Ohioans and Pennsylvanian workers into Guatemalan and Chinese sweat shops? Is he hiding corporate shares in foreign auto manufacturers that have employed thousands in foreign countries that can pay lower wages than GM or Ford on account of other nations' government paid health care? Is he hiding businesses that dispose of human fetuses?
All one can do is speculate because one knows Mitt is hiding something."
"The most telling aspect of the Swiss bank and Cayman Islands accounts is how astoundingly out-of-touch it makes Mitt appear to be that he did not get rid of these foreign accounts when he has known for years he was going to run for President. The question is not whether Mitt is avoiding taxes, but what is Mitt hiding from operation of public political disclosure laws?
The only conclusion one can draw is that whatever Mitt is hiding is even more politically damaging than the mere fact of ownership in these accounts, which is bad enough. Is he hiding businesses that have converted high paying jobs for Ohioans and Pennsylvanian workers into Guatemalan and Chinese sweat shops? Is he hiding corporate shares in foreign auto manufacturers that have employed thousands in foreign countries that can pay lower wages than GM or Ford on account of other nations' government paid health care? Is he hiding businesses that dispose of human fetuses?
All one can do is speculate because one knows Mitt is hiding something."
EXCLUSIVE: Romney Invested Millions in Chinese Firm That Profited on US Outsourcing
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/bain-capital-mitt-romney-outsourcing-china-global-tech
Last month, Mitt Romney's campaign got into a dustup with the Washington Post after the newspaper reported that Bain Capital, the private equity firm the GOP presidential candidate founded, invested in several US companies that outsourced jobs to China and India. The campaign indignantly demanded a retraction, claiming that these businesses did not send jobs overseas while Romney was running Bain, and the Post stood by its investigation. Yet there is another aspect to the Romney-as-outsourcer controversy. According to government documents reviewed by Mother Jones, Romney, when he was in charge of Bain, invested heavily in a Chinese manufacturing company that depended on US outsourcing for its profits—and that explicitly stated that such outsourcing was crucial to its success.
This previously unreported deal runs counter to Romney's tough talk on the campaign trail regarding China. "We will not let China continue to steal jobs from the United States of America," Romney declared in February. But with this investment, Romney sought to make money off a foreign company that banked on American firms outsourcing manufacturing overseas.
On April 17, 1998, Brookside Capital Partners Fund, a Bain Capital affiliate, filed a report with the Securities and Exchange Commission noting that it had acquired 6.13 percent of Hong Kong-based Global-Tech Appliances, which manufactured household appliances in a production facility in the industrial city of Dongguan, China. That August, according to another SEC filing, Brookside upped its interest in Global-Tech to 10.3 percent. Both SEC filings identified Romney as the person in control of this investment: "Mr. W. Mitt Romney is the sole shareholder, sole director, President and Chief Executive Officer of Brookside Inc. and thus is the controlling person of Brookside Inc." Each of these documents was signed by Domenic Ferrante, a managing director of Brookside and Bain.
.Advertise on MotherJones.com
The SEC filings do not reveal how much Romney initially invested in Global-Tech (which is now known as Global-Tech Advanced Innovations). But Brookside first acquired 748,000 shares at a time when Global-Tech was mounting an IPO at $19 a share. If that was the purchase price Brookside paid, then Romney's firm originally invested $14.2 million in the company.
At the time Romney was acquiring shares in Global-Tech, the firm publicly acknowledged that its strategy was to profit from prominent US companies outsourcing production abroad. On September 4, 1998, Global-Tech issued a press release announcing it was postponing completion of a $30 million expansion of its Dongguan facility because Sunbeam, a prominent American consumer products company and a major client of Global-Tech, was cutting back on outsourcing as part of an overall consolidation. But John C.K. Sham, Global-Tech's president and CEO, said, "Although it appears that customers such as Sunbeam are not outsourcing their manufacturing as quickly as we had anticipated, we still believe that the long-term trend toward outsourcing will continue." Global-Tech, which in mid-1998 announced fiscal year sales of $118.3 million (an increase of 89 percent over the previous year), also manufactured household appliances for Hamilton Beach, Mr. Coffee, Proctor-Silex, Revlon, and Vidal Sassoon, and its chief exec was hoping for more outsourcing from these and other American firms.
The Romney campaign and Bain Capital have insisted that Romney departed Bain in February 1999 to head the troubled 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City and had no involvement in the private equity firm's deals after that point—a contention that has been challenged by the Obama campaign. But the Global-Tech Appliances transactions occurred long before Romney jetted off to Utah.
At the time Romney was acquiring shares in Global-Tech, the firm publicly acknowledged that its strategy was to profit from prominent US companies outsourcing production abroad.Brookside downsized its Global-Tech holdings later in 1998. An SEC filing submitted on December 21, 1998, reported that the Bain affiliate now controlled only 4.63 percent of the company's shares. But Brookside was sharing its stake in Global-Tech with Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors LTD—a Bermuda-based corporation of which Romney was the "the sole shareholder, a director, and President." That is, Romney had split his Global-Tech holdings between two of his various business entities. (The SEC filing doesn't indicate why he did that.)
Sankaty is a story in itself. It was recently the focus of an Associated Press investigation that reported that Sankaty "is among several Romney holdings that have not been fully disclosed" and that there is a "mystery surrounding" Sankaty. Reporting on this Romney entity, Vanity Fair noted that "investments in tax havens such as Bermuda raise many questions, because they are in 'jurisdictions where there is virtually no tax and virtually no compliance,' as one Miami-based offshore lawyer put it." With Sankaty, Romney was using a mysterious Bermuda-based entity to invest in a Chinese firm that thrived on US outsourcing.
In early 1999, Romney's investment in Global-Tech expanded again. An SEC report filed on March 25, 1999, stated that Brookside and Sankaty at this stage owned 9.11 percent of the firm's stock. Romney was still listed as the sole shareholder and president of both Brookside and Sankaty.
By this point, according to the open-to-question account offered by Bain and the Romney campaign, Romney no longer had any involvement in Bain deals. But the series of SEC filings show active Brookside and Sankaty trading in Global-Tech Appliances while Romney fully controlled these firms. The two Romney companies repeatedly changed their ownership stake in this Chinese firm, which was not shy about its dependence on outsourcing. In its 2001 annual report, Global-Tech noted that US outsourcing was essential to its prospects: "Household appliance companies are focusing on their primary strengths of marketing and distribution, while increasingly outsourcing product development and manufacturing…Our ability and commitment to develop new and innovative, high quality products at a low cost has allowed us to benefit from the increased outsourcing of product development and manufacturing by our customers."
In August 2000, Brookside and Sankaty sold their interest in Global-Tech, according to the SEC documents. With these filings disclosing minimum details about Romney's investment in Global-Tech, there is no telling how much money he made—or lost—on the deal.
A spokeswoman for Bain says that the company will not comment on the Global-Tech investment or provide any additional details about this deal. A Romney campaign official would not address the issue of Global-Tech profiting from US outsourcing, but this Romney aide maintains that this deal was nothing other than a routine investment in a foreign company: "t's my understanding that while Brookside is a part of Bain Capital, it is not a private equity vehicle. Brookside makes passive investments in public stock. They don't control or manage the companies they invest in. Brookside had a small ownership stake (9.11%) in Global-Tech…while Romney was there. If owning shares in a foreign company is somehow wrong, President Obama is guilty as well." (The Romney campaign points out that Obama's personal holdings include an investment in a Vanguard 500 Index retirement fund that contains shares in a handful of foreign companies.)
In recent weeks, Romney's involvement in outsourcing has become a contentious campaign issue. Late last month, the Obama campaign launched ads that accused Romney of being a "corporate raider" who "shipped jobs to China and Mexico" and slammed him as an "outsourcer in chief." The Romneyites cried foul, pointing to neutral fact-checkers who criticized the ads, and asserted that Obama was trying to distract from bad economic news. And the Romney campaign, pushing back on the Post story, maintained that the newspaper missed the difference between outsourcing and offshoring. This week, Romney declared that Obama was the real "outsourcer-in-chief," insisting that the president funded "energy companies, solar and wind energy companies that end up making their products outside the United States." (The New York Times immediately debunked much of Romney's attack, and the Washington Post's "Fact Checker" column awarded four Pinocchios to an Americans for Prosperity ad that in April made a similar claim about Obama and green-jobs outsourcing.)
Romney's Global-Tech deal adds a new dimension to the debate over Romney and outsourcing. Whether or not he was at the helm when Bain invested in US firms that did or did not ship jobs overseas, Romney was in command when a company he owned and controlled bought a large stake in a Chinese venture that counted on American companies sending manufacturing—and that means jobs—to China. These days, Romney rails against China for swiping American jobs and proclaims, "For me, it's all about good jobs for the American people." But when there was money to be made by acquiring a chunk of a Chinese company that aimed to displace American manufacturers (and American workers), Romney's patriotism did not interfere with the potential for profit.
Mittens is toast.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/bain-capital-mitt-romney-outsourcing-china-global-tech
Last month, Mitt Romney's campaign got into a dustup with the Washington Post after the newspaper reported that Bain Capital, the private equity firm the GOP presidential candidate founded, invested in several US companies that outsourced jobs to China and India. The campaign indignantly demanded a retraction, claiming that these businesses did not send jobs overseas while Romney was running Bain, and the Post stood by its investigation. Yet there is another aspect to the Romney-as-outsourcer controversy. According to government documents reviewed by Mother Jones, Romney, when he was in charge of Bain, invested heavily in a Chinese manufacturing company that depended on US outsourcing for its profits—and that explicitly stated that such outsourcing was crucial to its success.
This previously unreported deal runs counter to Romney's tough talk on the campaign trail regarding China. "We will not let China continue to steal jobs from the United States of America," Romney declared in February. But with this investment, Romney sought to make money off a foreign company that banked on American firms outsourcing manufacturing overseas.
On April 17, 1998, Brookside Capital Partners Fund, a Bain Capital affiliate, filed a report with the Securities and Exchange Commission noting that it had acquired 6.13 percent of Hong Kong-based Global-Tech Appliances, which manufactured household appliances in a production facility in the industrial city of Dongguan, China. That August, according to another SEC filing, Brookside upped its interest in Global-Tech to 10.3 percent. Both SEC filings identified Romney as the person in control of this investment: "Mr. W. Mitt Romney is the sole shareholder, sole director, President and Chief Executive Officer of Brookside Inc. and thus is the controlling person of Brookside Inc." Each of these documents was signed by Domenic Ferrante, a managing director of Brookside and Bain.
.Advertise on MotherJones.com
The SEC filings do not reveal how much Romney initially invested in Global-Tech (which is now known as Global-Tech Advanced Innovations). But Brookside first acquired 748,000 shares at a time when Global-Tech was mounting an IPO at $19 a share. If that was the purchase price Brookside paid, then Romney's firm originally invested $14.2 million in the company.
At the time Romney was acquiring shares in Global-Tech, the firm publicly acknowledged that its strategy was to profit from prominent US companies outsourcing production abroad. On September 4, 1998, Global-Tech issued a press release announcing it was postponing completion of a $30 million expansion of its Dongguan facility because Sunbeam, a prominent American consumer products company and a major client of Global-Tech, was cutting back on outsourcing as part of an overall consolidation. But John C.K. Sham, Global-Tech's president and CEO, said, "Although it appears that customers such as Sunbeam are not outsourcing their manufacturing as quickly as we had anticipated, we still believe that the long-term trend toward outsourcing will continue." Global-Tech, which in mid-1998 announced fiscal year sales of $118.3 million (an increase of 89 percent over the previous year), also manufactured household appliances for Hamilton Beach, Mr. Coffee, Proctor-Silex, Revlon, and Vidal Sassoon, and its chief exec was hoping for more outsourcing from these and other American firms.
The Romney campaign and Bain Capital have insisted that Romney departed Bain in February 1999 to head the troubled 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City and had no involvement in the private equity firm's deals after that point—a contention that has been challenged by the Obama campaign. But the Global-Tech Appliances transactions occurred long before Romney jetted off to Utah.
At the time Romney was acquiring shares in Global-Tech, the firm publicly acknowledged that its strategy was to profit from prominent US companies outsourcing production abroad.Brookside downsized its Global-Tech holdings later in 1998. An SEC filing submitted on December 21, 1998, reported that the Bain affiliate now controlled only 4.63 percent of the company's shares. But Brookside was sharing its stake in Global-Tech with Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors LTD—a Bermuda-based corporation of which Romney was the "the sole shareholder, a director, and President." That is, Romney had split his Global-Tech holdings between two of his various business entities. (The SEC filing doesn't indicate why he did that.)
Sankaty is a story in itself. It was recently the focus of an Associated Press investigation that reported that Sankaty "is among several Romney holdings that have not been fully disclosed" and that there is a "mystery surrounding" Sankaty. Reporting on this Romney entity, Vanity Fair noted that "investments in tax havens such as Bermuda raise many questions, because they are in 'jurisdictions where there is virtually no tax and virtually no compliance,' as one Miami-based offshore lawyer put it." With Sankaty, Romney was using a mysterious Bermuda-based entity to invest in a Chinese firm that thrived on US outsourcing.
In early 1999, Romney's investment in Global-Tech expanded again. An SEC report filed on March 25, 1999, stated that Brookside and Sankaty at this stage owned 9.11 percent of the firm's stock. Romney was still listed as the sole shareholder and president of both Brookside and Sankaty.
By this point, according to the open-to-question account offered by Bain and the Romney campaign, Romney no longer had any involvement in Bain deals. But the series of SEC filings show active Brookside and Sankaty trading in Global-Tech Appliances while Romney fully controlled these firms. The two Romney companies repeatedly changed their ownership stake in this Chinese firm, which was not shy about its dependence on outsourcing. In its 2001 annual report, Global-Tech noted that US outsourcing was essential to its prospects: "Household appliance companies are focusing on their primary strengths of marketing and distribution, while increasingly outsourcing product development and manufacturing…Our ability and commitment to develop new and innovative, high quality products at a low cost has allowed us to benefit from the increased outsourcing of product development and manufacturing by our customers."
In August 2000, Brookside and Sankaty sold their interest in Global-Tech, according to the SEC documents. With these filings disclosing minimum details about Romney's investment in Global-Tech, there is no telling how much money he made—or lost—on the deal.
A spokeswoman for Bain says that the company will not comment on the Global-Tech investment or provide any additional details about this deal. A Romney campaign official would not address the issue of Global-Tech profiting from US outsourcing, but this Romney aide maintains that this deal was nothing other than a routine investment in a foreign company: "t's my understanding that while Brookside is a part of Bain Capital, it is not a private equity vehicle. Brookside makes passive investments in public stock. They don't control or manage the companies they invest in. Brookside had a small ownership stake (9.11%) in Global-Tech…while Romney was there. If owning shares in a foreign company is somehow wrong, President Obama is guilty as well." (The Romney campaign points out that Obama's personal holdings include an investment in a Vanguard 500 Index retirement fund that contains shares in a handful of foreign companies.)
In recent weeks, Romney's involvement in outsourcing has become a contentious campaign issue. Late last month, the Obama campaign launched ads that accused Romney of being a "corporate raider" who "shipped jobs to China and Mexico" and slammed him as an "outsourcer in chief." The Romneyites cried foul, pointing to neutral fact-checkers who criticized the ads, and asserted that Obama was trying to distract from bad economic news. And the Romney campaign, pushing back on the Post story, maintained that the newspaper missed the difference between outsourcing and offshoring. This week, Romney declared that Obama was the real "outsourcer-in-chief," insisting that the president funded "energy companies, solar and wind energy companies that end up making their products outside the United States." (The New York Times immediately debunked much of Romney's attack, and the Washington Post's "Fact Checker" column awarded four Pinocchios to an Americans for Prosperity ad that in April made a similar claim about Obama and green-jobs outsourcing.)
Romney's Global-Tech deal adds a new dimension to the debate over Romney and outsourcing. Whether or not he was at the helm when Bain invested in US firms that did or did not ship jobs overseas, Romney was in command when a company he owned and controlled bought a large stake in a Chinese venture that counted on American companies sending manufacturing—and that means jobs—to China. These days, Romney rails against China for swiping American jobs and proclaims, "For me, it's all about good jobs for the American people." But when there was money to be made by acquiring a chunk of a Chinese company that aimed to displace American manufacturers (and American workers), Romney's patriotism did not interfere with the potential for profit.
Mittens is toast.
Boston Globe: Romney Stayed At Bain 3 Years Longer Than He Stated
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/boston-globe-romney-stayed-at-bain-3-years?ref=fpb
The Boston Globe digs up SEC documents that show Mitt Romney stayed at Bain Capital three years longer than he stated, claiming he remained the firm’s “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president.” Romney has said he left the private equity firm in 1999 to lead the Olympics in Salt Lake City. From the Globe’s report:
Also, a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002. And Romney’s state financial disclosure forms indicate he earned at least $100,000 as a Bain “executive” in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings.
Lets see what lies Mittens says to get out of this.
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/boston-globe-romney-stayed-at-bain-3-years?ref=fpb
The Boston Globe digs up SEC documents that show Mitt Romney stayed at Bain Capital three years longer than he stated, claiming he remained the firm’s “sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president.” Romney has said he left the private equity firm in 1999 to lead the Olympics in Salt Lake City. From the Globe’s report:
Also, a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002. And Romney’s state financial disclosure forms indicate he earned at least $100,000 as a Bain “executive” in 2001 and 2002, separate from investment earnings.
Lets see what lies Mittens says to get out of this.
More in depth article here. excellent.
liked this post.
"Take the grief Romney is getting for releasing one tax return, multiply it by ten and take a guess at why he doesn't want to release all his tax returns. By the time Obama's and the MSM's accountants and lawyers get finished reviewing them line by line, Romney may have to MOVE to Switzerland."
Now NAACP officials are accusing him of flying in African American supporters to rig the crowd during his speech to them.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...w-in-supporters-houston-speech_n_1668867.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...w-in-supporters-houston-speech_n_1668867.html
It was probably a big group of black mormons....oh, wait a minute....
So Romney's been complaining about negative campaign in ads on the part of Obama, but isn't that par for the course Stateside? As i recall the gloves were off during the race to decide the Republican nominee.
What either would make of the more formal and tam style of a partly political broadcast i don't know.
What either would make of the more formal and tam style of a partly political broadcast i don't know.
Everyone moans about Obama constantly campaigning, but that's the nature of the system. If they changed it to be more like the UK, where it's over in two months, the biggest outcry would come from pols and their backers because it would destroy the money-go-round that modern presidential campaigns have become.
I head Santorum is brushing up on his nomination acceptance speech. 
Considering how the other day all the people in the background during Romney's response to Obama's under 250k tax cut were white, perhaps there is some truth in the NAACP story. I noticed a huge difference between attendees for Obama (all ages, all races) and Romney (mostly over-40 looking and white).
Romney may have thought it very clever to use the black audience response to strengthen his conservative base, but in reality he lost more independents. The GOP base will turn out...though they may not be all that enthusiastic....but if his goal was to win the General Election, he did nothing to help his cause.
Seriously, Santorum will galvanize the GOP base and even if he seems ultra conservative at least the guy seems genuine.
Seriously, Santorum will galvanize the GOP base and even if he seems ultra conservative at least the guy seems genuine.
- Status