The Official Willard Mitt Romney Thread

Race Harley

Rising Star
Platinum Member
Re: Just an Observation . . .

You bolded what it is. Mittens has little or no respect for Pres. Obama and that disrespect spread through the family.

Look back at the debates and how many times did Mittens say, "I'm talking here" when he and Pres. Obama started to mix it up, but he was quick to talk over the President when he wanted to make a point.

That whole family's fucked up. :smh:
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator



6hkNe.SlMa.91.jpg


 

muckraker10021

Superstar *****
BGOL Investor

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
<div align="right"><!-- MSTableType="layout" --><img src="http://i.min.us/iW6E1Tob.jpg" align="right"></div>
- Albert Einstein -


The RMoney campaign from the beginning to these final days has been an unmitigated shameless 24/7 LIE!

RMoney believes that all the lying won't matter, even when <s>"low information"</s> dumb voters figure out he is a fraud and a phony uttering his 47% of Americans are parasites remarks, and the fact that his math doesn't add up.......because.......he's NOT the Black guy in the race.

That is RMoney's whole campaign in two sentences.
RMoney knows that almost 4 years into Obama's presidency that 65% of RepubliKlan voters still believe that Obama was born in Kenya.

He knows that 95% of the voters who will vote in this 2012 cycle don't know what a U.S. Senate filibuster is, and that the U.S. Senate RepubliKlans have filibustered over 350 Obama administration supported bills that had more than 51 votes in the U.S. senate.

Let's put that 350 filibusters into context;......when President Lyndon Johnson was senate majority leader for the six years prior to him becoming John Kennedy's Vice President in 1960 for the entire six years the Republicans filibustered a total of 6 times.

The video below briefly recaps and highlights the disaster that Cheney-BuShit handed to Obama. Cheney-BuShit took a Clinton surplus and turned it into massive deficits via massive tax cuts for the top 1%, including a 15% capital gains rate. RMoney's plan if he becomes president is to cut taxes an additional 20% by bringing back the exact same two men (Glen Hubbard & John Taylor) whose economic advice turned the surplus into a deficit........and actually make one of them Federal Reserve Chairman.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results




<img src="http://i.minus.com/ibduFHLTzybp5Z.jpg" width="800">





i3VZ2HdA9EwPP.gif



The No Agenda Myth


October 28, 2012

by Bill Keller


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/29/o...?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0&pagewanted=print

I feel a rising tide of ennui. America is in the last, numbing days of an excruciating slog to Election Day and some of my tribe — the jaded scribes, the blogging sages and caffeinated cable chatterers — have run out of patience, poor babies. Searching for the source of their malaise, beyond the dubious science of the polls and the mean spirits of the campaigns and the emptiness of the slogans and our own limited attention spans, those of my ilk have come up with this high-minded diagnosis: the candidates have No Agenda.

They say: “It’s a good time to follow the candidates if you like elections about nothing.” And: “Obama’s greatest weakness is that his proposals for the future are nonexistent.” And: “The president did not lay out a second-term agenda ... And that is where he is the weakest.” And: “People say, I want to vote for him, but he hasn’t told me what he’s going to do.” And, by the way: “You don’t get that from Mitt Romney, either.” I’ve heard it countless times and, truth be told, probably said it myself once or twice. No Agenda!

When President Obama’s campaign last week issued a 20-page booklet of its intentions, it was dismissed in my own newspaper for containing “no new proposals,” and in The Wall Street Journal as a “glossy” pitch to critics who say “Mr. Obama hasn’t fully explained what he hopes to accomplish if re-elected.” Romney has made the ostensible lack of an Obama agenda the heart of his closing argument. That’s shrewd politics. The No Agenda meme works nicely for Romney. If Obama has no agenda then he is, by default, the candidate of the status quo, and the status quo is a painfully slow recovery, a hovering debt crisis and a worrisome world. Obama’s retort is that Romney is trying to hide his agenda — dressing a pack of wolves in sheep’s clothing.

But Romney, with or without an agenda, is the candidate who has not presided over a time of national anxiety, and therefore he is the de facto candidate of change. Or as the new slogan has it, “Big Change.”

Let us breathe deeply and clear our minds.

There are plenty of legitimate reasons voters (and the media) should be disenchanted by the candidates and the campaign, but the idea that we’ll be voting in the dark is not one of them. Yes, the candidates have been reluctant to publish some unpleasant details of their policies. [See footnote 1] Most presidential candidates in modern times don’t, for the understandable reason that details can be cherry-picked for attack ads. Yes, identifying Romney’s plan requires some guesswork, because he has been at various times all things to all voters. And yes, Obama has been short on grand man-to-the-moon promises and on the pulse-quickening oratory our weary commentariat requires. He sometimes seems to have misread Mario Cuomo’s famous guidance: he governs in prose and campaigns in prose.

And yet, can we really say we don’t know what to expect from these two men?

<b><span style="background-color:yellow">With Obama, we can anticipate that the unfinished business of universal health care and the re-regulation of the Wall Street casino will be finished.</span>

<span style="background-color:yellow">We can expect investments in education, infrastructure and innovation, followed by a gradual, balanced attack on deficits that includes higher taxes on the wealthiest. (And this time he will have a hefty stick to apply to a recalcitrant Congress: the fiscal cliff, which forces Congress to compromise or share the blame for the ensuing havoc.) </span>

<span style="background-color:yellow">We can expect the Pentagon, after winding down two wars, to bank a peace dividend. </span>

<span style="background-color:yellow">If Obama is re-elected, especially if he is elected with substantial Latino support, we can expect that he will try to deliver on his postponed promise of comprehensive immigration reform. The fact that these objectives represent a continuation of his first term does not mean he is aiming low. These are ambitious goals.</span></b>


<b><span style="background-color:yellow">If Romney is elected, there will be tension between his inner pragmatist and the stubborn extremists in his own party, but we can fairly expect a rollback of universal health care in favor of the rough marketplace, and at least a partial dismantling of regulations on banks, extractive industries and whatever other industries squeal about job-killing red tape.</span>

<span style="background-color:yellow">We can expect a lowering of the safety net, especially a retrenchment of Medicaid and a marketization of Medicare.</span>

<span style="background-color:yellow">His deficit plan will rely on draconian spending cuts and on the supply-side superstition that tax cuts automatically produce growth.</span>

<span style="background-color:yellow">Romney will be somewhat more enthusiastic about oil and coal, and will put less faith in renewables.</span>

<span style="background-color:yellow">Romney will add massive additional spending on the military that they do not want.</span>

<span style="background-color:yellow">You can expect another Scalia or two on the Supreme Court, the defunding of Planned Parenthood and a social agenda aimed at appeasing the evangelical base, mainly by letting the states decide.</span></b>

On foreign policy Romney has gravitated toward Obama’s caution, and I tend to believe him, if only because whoever is president will have his hands too full at home to embark on a war in Iran or Syria as long as it is avoidable. [See footnote 2]

There’s more, but you get the idea. Two agendas; compare and contrast.

The second thing to say is that an “agenda” is at best a rough guide to what a president will do, given the constraints imposed by Congress, curveballs pitched by fate, and what presidents learn on the job. Presidents surprise you, and surprise themselves. Obama really meant to close Guantánamo; he lost that one. I think he intended to reform immigration until other priorities took his energy. Libya was certainly not high on his 2008 agenda.

And that is why — third point — we don’t elect agendas, we don’t elect platforms, we don’t even elect parties to the presidency. This is not a referendum or a ballot initiative. Indeed, we are skeptical of agendas. If either candidate had announced in his final weeks some grandiose initiative of the kind the pundits prescribe, we’d have mocked it as October-surprise gimmickry, a sign of desperation. We elect the human being we trust to have our best interests in mind. We choose a direction, a disposition, a set of instincts and convictions and competencies.

When voters tell pundits, and pundits tell us, that they are frustrated that the candidates lack an agenda, they are just saying they wish we could foretell the future. If we could do that, a lot of pundits would be out of business.


Footnote 1: The most familiar example of withholding details, of course, is Romney’s refusal to identify which tax breaks he would eliminate to offset the revenues lost by reducing income tax rates. He knows perfectly well that tax deductions for things like home mortgages and charitable donations are popular and well defended by lobbyists. But lost in that whole discussion was one of the more interesting ideas of the campaign season.

Romney said that rather than abolish popular tax breaks, he would cap deductions at a fixed amount; at various times he tossed out $17,000, $25,000 and $50,000 as possible limits.

The inescapable problem with Romney’s plan, as the impartial Tax Policy Center calculated, is that the math doesn’t work. Even if you eliminate all personal deductions, you recoup less than half of the $4 trillion to $5 trillion cost of his plan to lower income tax rates by 20 percent. Capping deductions recoups even less.

But that doesn’t mean capping deductions is a bad idea. It is a lot easier than taking on the constituencies and lobbyists defending each specific tax break. It’s simple, politically doable and highly progressive. In short, as the Tax Policy Center’s Roberton Williams and Howard Gleckman have explained on the center’s blog, while it doesn’t raise the amount Romney needs to make his math work, it’s an excellent way to raise revenues. Obama should think about grabbing it.

Footnote 2: If I had to bet which candidate was more likely to launch airstrikes against Iran or to up the military ante in Syria, I’d be inclined to give a slight edge to Obama. He has already crossed the daunting psychological threshold of dispensing death: surge troops, drone strikes, the Bin Laden raid. Romney talks tough, but has never had to make the hard decision to use force, which is easier said than done.



<hr noshade color="#ff0000" size="8"></hr>

boner-jobs.jpg
boner-singlething.jpg


bush-hide-tree-gwb.jpg
 
Last edited:

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Re: Republicans Never Miss An Opportunity To Politicize A Tragedy

Okay, serious question: How did you know Sandy would hit the U.S. East Coast 20 days before it did :hmm: :hmm: :hmm:
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Confronted By Protester, Romney Maintains Climate Silence

source: Think Progress



Mitt Romney stood silently as an activist interrupted the GOP presidential candidate’s event in Virginia Beach, Virginia on Thursday afternoon, to ask why he’s been ignoring the connection between climate change and Hurricane Sandy. The former Massachusetts governor quietly smiled, while the man held up a sign that read “End Climate Silence,” and resumed his stump speech without ever addressing the issue:
MAN: Romney! What about climate? That’s what caused this monster storm! Climate change!
ROMNEY: [silent]

CROWD: BOO! USA! USA! USA!
Watch it:


<CENTER><IFRAME height=260 src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/43lcd11QUqo" frameBorder=0 width=400 allowfullscreen></IFRAME></CENTER>
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
I don't think "how much" Romney has made is what is at issue with the tax returns at all. I think the important issues include: how much (percentage-wise) did he pay in taxes; and whether his off-shore accounts were used to reduce his tax rate.

Do you think those things might be important ???


No response, he gave up!

busted.jpg
 

muckraker10021

Superstar *****
BGOL Investor
'CAVEAT EMPTOR'!! - RMoney & RepubliKlans Have Plans In Place TO STEAL the Election!


'CAVEAT EMPTOR'!!
RMoney & RepubliKlans Have Plans In Place TO STEAL the Election!



'Caveat Emptor'
"To be Forewarned is to be Forearmed"

I can report with certainty that the upper echelon of the Obama campaign knows about the information posted below.

The only debate would be how seriously they are taking this information and what plans they have implemented to make sure they don’t get screwed by any of these plans coming to fruition
We’ll see in just a few days




<hr noshade color="#333333" size="4"></hr>

<img src="http://i.minus.com/ibxLAvkkxohw6U.png" width="800">


DOWNLOAD & READ This Important Article

The link is below for the entire article, pdf


https://www.rapidshare.com/files/656694078/Harps_Rig_Election_Nov_2012.zip

Short Article Excerpt - HERE


<hr noshade color="#333333" size="4"></hr>


ibcIQn5O8eW3VT.JPG



The Free Press confirms installation, secret justification of uncertified last minute election tabulation reporting software in Ohio


by Gerry Bello and Bob Fitrakis

<span class="blinking">November 2, 2012
</span>

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2012/4768

The Free Press has obtained internal memos from the senior staff of the Ohio Secretary of State's office confirming the installation of untested and uncertified election tabulation software. Yesterday, the Free Press reported that "experimental" software patches were installed on ES&S voting machines in 39 Ohio counties. (see Will "experimental" software patches affect the Ohio vote?).

Election Counsel Brandi Laser Seske circulated a memo dated November 1st renewing the already shaky justification for installing software made by Election Systems and Solutions on vote tabulation equipment used in 39 Ohio counties. The letter to Ohio Secretary of State personnel Matt Masterson, Danielle Sellars, Myra Hawkins, Betsy Schuster, and Ohio's Director of Elections Matthew Damschroder, clarified the dubious justification for not complying with the legal requirements for the examination of all election related equipment.

Seske begins by explaining what she purports to be the purpose of the software patch: "Its function is to aid in the reporting of results that are already uploaded into the county's system. The software formats results that have already been uploaded by the county into a format that can be read by the Secretary of State's election night reporting system."

According to the contract between the Ohio Secretary of State's office and ES&S, this last minute "experimental" software update will supposedly transmit custom election night reports to the Secretary of State's office from the county boards of elections, bypassing the normal election night reporting methods.

In order to justify this unusual parallel reporting method, Seske explains "It is not part of the certified Unity system, so it did not require federal testing." This attempt to skirt federal and state law from one of the most partisan Secretary of State offices in the nation ignores basic facts of how modern information systems function.

Seske continues "Because the software is not 1) involved in the tabulation or casting of ballots (or in communicating between systems involved in the tabulation or casting of ballots) or 2) a modification to a certified system, the BVME [Board of Voting Machine Examiners] was not required to review the software." These claims are factually unsound. The software, although not communicating actual ballot information, facilitates communication between systems upon which votes are tabulated and stored. Although the software purports to not modify the tabulation system software, it is itself a modification to the whole tabulation system. This is why certification and testing is required in all cases.

Just as in 2004, the Ohio Secretary of State's office has enabled the possibility of a "man in the middle" attack. This software, functioning on a network through which votes are transmitted could act to intercept, alter or destroy votes from counties where it is not even installed, hence the "man in the middle" nickname.

On September 19, the last minute contract between ES&S and the Ohio Secretary of State's office was inked. Within a week, Seske wrote "He [Matt Masterson] has reviewed and approved the changes." Masterson is the Deputy Director of Elections. After Masterson's approval, Seske acted to bypass the Ohio Board of Voting Machine Examiners required review.

"Pursuant to the board's policy, each change will be approved unless three members of the BVME request a meeting to review a change within 15 days of today's date. Given the proximately of the upcoming election, please let me know as soon as possible whether you will be requesting a meeting to review the changes," wrote Seske.

Government reports such as Ohio's Everest study document that any single change to the system could corrupt the whole voting process.

An unelected, partisan group of attorneys appears to have conspired to install election software without testing and certification that they are professionally unqualified to pass judgment upon. These types of last minute installations of software patches on voting machines are considered suspect by knowledgeable and experienced election protection attorneys, in light of all the voting machine irregularities exposed during the 2004 election in Ohio.

-------------------

Gerry Bello is the chief researcher at the Columbus Free Press. He holds a degree in computer security from Antioch College. Bob Fitrakis is the Editor of the Free Press. He holds Ph.D. in Political Science and a J.D. from the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University.



<hr noshade color="#333333" size="6"></hr>

ibrwbkpEpMWG3J.JPG




Romney's Halloween Trick On Ohio Voters


October 31, 2012

by Jim Hightower


http://www.jimhightower.com/node/7875

If you really want to scare people this Halloween, go trick-or-treating dressed as an Ohio voting machine.

The "black box" e-vote machines that Ohioans will use on November 6 are owned by Hart Intercivic – but that disguises the real owner. Last year, Hart was taken over by an investment fund with the cryptic name of HIG Capital. Peek into HIG, and you'll find that of its 22 American directors, 21 are donors to Mitt Romney's campaign, and a third of them had been money managers at Bain & Company, the hedge fund that gave Mitt his start in corporate plundering.

But the enigma within Ohio's machines goes even deeper than these cozy partisan ties suggest, for HIG itself is largely owned by an inscrutable private equity creature called Solomere. Who dat? Solomere was formed by Romney's oldest son, Tagg, and financed by Mama Ann Romney and Uncle Scott Romney, with Papa Mitt himself chipping in $10 million and personally pitching Solomere to other rich investors.

Like father, like son – Tagg cloaks the fund's operations through a dark maze of offshore tax shelters. And, now, the son has slipped out of Solomere to be a top campaign manager for his father. This slippery guy gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "playing Tagg."

One wonders if Tagg's campaign duties include "monitoring" Ohio's voting machines. Can the Romneys even spell conflict-of-interest? The people's trust in the fairness of our democratic elections has already been severely eroded by the unlimited corporate cash flooding into the process, but what are we to make of a multimillionaire presidential candidate with secret financial and crony control of the machines that can decide the outcome in this key swing state? I ask you: Of all the things the Romneys could invest in – why voting machines?




<hr noshade color="#333333" size="6"></hr>


NSA Analyst Proves GOP Is Stealing Elections



by Denis G. Campbell and Charley James

October 25, 2012


UPDATED: Why is Mitt Romney so confident?

In states where the winner will be decided by less than 10%, of the vote he already knows he will win. This is no tinfoil hat conspiracy. It’s a maths problem. And mathematics showed changes in actual raw voting data that had no statistical correlation other than programmable computer fraud. This computer fraud resulted in votes being flipped from Democrat to Republican in every federal, senatorial, congressional and gubernatorial election since 2008 (thus far) and in the 2012 primary contests from other Republicans to Mitt Romney.

This goes well beyond Romney’s investment control in voting machine maker Hart Intercivic and Diebold’s close ties to George W. Bush. Indeed all five voting machine companies have very strong GOP fundraising ties, yet executives (including the candidate’s son Tagg Romney) insist there is no conflict between massively supporting one party financially whilst controlling the machines that record and count the votes.

A retired NSA analyst has spent several sleepless nights applying a simple formula to past election results across Arizona. His results showed across-the-board systemic election fraud on a coordinated and massive scale. But the analysis indicated that this only happens in larger precincts because anomalies in small precincts can be more easily detected........

READ THE REST - HERE



<hr noshade color="#333333" size="6"></hr>

cosby-second-term.jpg
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:



source: Huffington Post


Mitt Romney 'Shellshocked' After Lost Election, Adviser Says



WASHINGTON -- As Republicans search for reasons why they came up short in Tuesday's elections, anonymous Mitt Romney advisers have described what it was like to be with the former governor as he came to terms with his loss.

"He was shellshocked," one adviser told CBS News.

Another unnamed senior adviser explained that as returns came in and battleground states went into President Barack Obama's Electoral College column, they felt their paths to potential victory narrowing. CBS reports that the campaign was unprepared for this in part because it had ignored polling that showed the races favoring Obama. Instead, it turned to its own internal "unskewed" polls, which it believed more accurately reflected the situation on the ground. They didn't.

On the eve of the election, a number of polling aggregators, including HuffPost's Pollster and New York Times' FiveThirtyEight, showed Obama with a huge statistical advantage over Romney.

When it was clear that Romney had lost the race and had to concede, his personal assistant, Garrett Jackson, called his counterpart in the Obama campaign, Marvin Nicholson, to connect the two men.

As CBS' Jan Greenburg writes in her article:
Romney was stoic as he talked to the president, an aide said, but his wife Ann cried. Running mate Paul Ryan seemed genuinely shocked, the adviser said. Ryan's wife Janna also was shaken and cried softly.
The New York Times' tick-tock of the events that night at the Boston Intercontinental Hotel includes this anecdote:
Bob White, a close Romney friend and adviser, was prepared to tell the waiting crowd that Mr. Romney would not yet concede.
But then, Mr. Romney quietly decided it was over. "It's not going to happen," he said.

As Ann Romney cried softly, he headed down to deliver his speech, ending his second, and presumably last, bid for the White House.
As evidence of the Romney campaign's sincere belief that the former Massachusetts governor would emerge victorious on Tuesday night, the Boston Globe reported Thursday that it had planned to fete Romney's election with an eight-minute display of fireworks over Boston Harbor.

"It was not an intense, grand finale-type of display for eight minutes, but it certainly was a fast-paced show to cap off the evening, if it were necessary," Steve Pelkey, the CEO of Atlas Professional Fireworks Displays, told the Globe.

Romney also told reporters on his campaign plane earlier this week that while he had written a victory speech, he hadn't prepared concession remarks.
:
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/VDW0ZnZxjn4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 

thoughtone

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
romney-man-crush.jpg

Romney to NBC: Putin has outperformed Obama ‘time and time again on world stage’


January 25, 2014
 
Top