Newark Mayor Cory Booker, widely considered a rising star in Democratic politics, raised quite a few eyebrows yesterday when he denounced criticism of Mitt Romney's work at Bain Capital.
On NBC's "Meet the Press," Booker said, "[F]rom a very personal level, I'm not about to sit here and indict private equity," adding he's "very uncomfortable with" the recent talk about Bain. Drawing a parallel between attacks on Jeremiah Wright and criticism of Romney's private-sector work, the mayor said, "[T]his kind of stuff is nauseating to me on both sides."
It was an unexpected, and rather confusing, argument. For one thing, I've seen no evidence of Democrats attacking private equity in general, but rather, criticizing Romney's specific tactics: orchestrating leveraged buyouts, loading up companies with large debts, flipping them quickly for large profits, and treating thousands of laid off workers as collateral damage. For another, Obama isn't running around saying, "Vote for me because I was a member of Wright's church," so comparing Bain criticism to The Ricketts Plan is misplaced.
As reports of Booker's comments spread -- Republicans were promoting them heavily -- the mayor felt the need to clarify matters in a YouTube clip.
It's hard to see this as anything but a reversal. Whereas on "Meet the Press," Booker said in no uncertain terms, "Stop attacking private equity," the mayor said in his clip, "Let me be clear: Mitt Romney has made his business record a centerpiece of his campaign. He's talked about himself as a job creator. And therefore it is reasonable -- and in fact I encourage it -- for the Obama campaign to examine that record and discuss it. I have no problem with that."
Apparently, upon further reflection, the scrutiny of Bain is less "nauseating" after all.
Booker added, "In fact, I believe that Mitt Romney, in many ways, is not being completely honest with his role and his record even while a businessperson, and is shaping it to serve his political interest -- and not necessary include all the facts of his time there."
The walk-back was no doubt welcome news at President Obama's campaign headquarters, but it may be a while before Booker lives this one down. The Newark mayor has been a popular Obama surrogate, but I suspect his role won't be as high profile going forward.
To be sure, plenty of Booker's constituents work in private equity, so it stands to reason he's going to defend the industry -- though the industry is not itself under attack -- but when the Republican National Committee can exploit the on-air comments of a rising Democratic star, after he undermined one of his own party's key election-year messages, it's easy to imagine Booker riding the bench for a while.
Incidentally, CNBC's Jim Cramer, who's generally not considered an Obama ally, also appeared on "Meet the Press" yesterday and said, "Romney's known as a job destroyer, not a creator.... I think Bain sticks. I think the idea that you bring in Bain, which is what happened in the '80s. They fire a lot of people and that's how they get prosperity for the rich."
Leave a Comment:
Romney is running on his "business experience" at Bain, so of course this is fair game in an election. Bain was a profit-making venture for Mitt, Bain and the other well-heeled investors Romney took on. It had nothing to with creating jobs. How can Romney profess to fix a jobs crisis when all he knows is how to kill jobs and make himself richer? Mitt Romney is not a normal American. He is an out of touch multi-millionaire that has never had to experience the true struggles of daily American life in his entire privileged existence. Despite the embarrassing protestations from Mr. Booker, Mitt's disturbing record at Bain offers great insight into his character and background. http://www.sunstateactivist.org
I think the idea is that Bain was more than just one or two transactions, so why not focus also on many of the successful business turnarounds. If all you do is pick a few of many, and then only those that failed, it could appear that you are attacking the process/the industry instead of the whole of a legitimate record.
That said, I have to say I was surprise to even see this addressed here. Kudos to Mr. Benen and TRMS.
You both make excellent points.
A candidate's past experience is just about the only real way any of us can judge how he will perform as president.
That said, I am not entirely ready to throw Mayor Booker under the bus for his remarks. It's not that investment banking and venture capital aren't legitimate businesses...they are. Good people work in them and they DO provide employment for more than just the shareholders and investors. Think about all the ordinary secretaries, legal assistants, office workers, etc. who are employed by those companies. Increasingly, in modern times - especially along the eastern and western seaboards - these are the industries which DO make jobs for people.
So, Booker hasn't impugned an industry from which he receives a great deal of financial support. But he HAS done due Democratic diligence (how's that for alliteration?!) by criticizing Mitt Romney's job performance while he ran Bain.
It would be helpful to state some of those successes,instead of assertions.
The point is, people find it difficult to distinguish between venture capitalist activities and private equity activities and Mitt isn't making things easy for himself.Romney is not a job creator,he has never created any business.Read the "The Real Romney" to understand.He is in essence a BUSINESS PARASITE.
Staples and Sports Authority are the two most well known. Bain invested in start-ups and provided capital and leaderships to companies that were going under. Just the nature of those investments mean that all of them will not be successful.
Should Obama be judged only on Solyndra and Fisker? Of course not. There is one big difference, that is one uses private funds, the other tax payer money. Still, I think you have to look broader to get an accurate picture. If you don't know both sides, you can't fairly assess.
So, what did Romney do with his "bid'nessman" experience in the public sector? He brought Massachussetts in 47th out of 50th in job creation while he was governor - that's pre-recession - his state was almost dead last in job creation.
So, for all of Romney's claims to want to focus on the economy, how long will it take him to cry foul when it's pointed out that he doesn't know what he's doing there, either?
As for Corey Booker - I hope he now realizes we are in "a kind of cold civil war" as Al Gore said years ago, and false equivalencies don't do us any favors.
It is funny,because i new you'll cite these two.Staples and Sports Authority are as result of venture capital,and most often venture capitalists,have guarantees,so LEADERSHIP is not a word i would personally choose,SECURITY? yes.
The ads illustrate some private equity activities that Bain made.
You don't seem to have an extensive understanding to what the differences are between these two activities.
To tout Solyndra and Fisker failures as equivalence of Romney activities in private sector is just crazy.
By the way i thought Romney was Gov. of Massachusetts at some point in his life?,why doesn't he run on his record.At least it would be easier to compare public sector records.
Remember we have a private sector guy for 8years and you know what his sucessful leadership did to our country.
Romney is the one that must make his record clear , asking people on here too make it clear is rather ridiculous ....There hass been a huge disconnect between the american economy , jobs and wall st for the last 25 years , it use to be connected , but not any more , so DC and everyone needs top stop pretending they are all connected
The WALL ST MODEL is to lower wages and benefits , reduce labor , and ship jobs over seas , this IS what romney is proud to represent , and it does not support a strong working class , no matter how you flip it on its head ...
Wall st romney has become mega wealthy the last 20 years , if that is suppose to translate into our economy and jobs doing fabulous , then why the disconnect? Shouldn't romney be at the forefront of SHOWING me the actual trickle down? I'm all ears
no evidence of Dem's attacking priviate equity?- see this blog.
With friends like Cory Booker Obama does not need GOP enemies.Peolple like Cory and Harold Ford the blue dog democratic choose the time they have on TV to promote themselves to get the support of the 1% they are courting, either for future jobs or to get money to support their future political ambition. In the case of Ford he just doing is best to keep is job with JP Morgan, did he ever pass his bar exam?
Another blip on the radar . Soon to be forgotten in this "bring on the next shiny object " MSM. The election reporting is calculated in dog months with every nanosecond amplified by 7 .
AMEN.
My favorite example..... everyone trashing Mitt and Bain during the primaries....especially Newtie who used it to win SC ...
Whaaaat ... we never said that
-And bitch slap in 3-2-1. . .
What? It has already happened? Nevermind.
Why shoot your mouth off with dumb statements like that, Mr. Booker? Walking it back in some obscure video on You Tube doesn't exactly have the same impact as on Meet the Press.
so Mr. Booker expresses his views- he is I guess a Democrat- and because the view he expresses are not those of a "good" Democrat- then he gets put on the ice flow- what country we live in-
Mayor Booker must have a friend who is a venture capitalist, or he is auditioning for a new career as the replacement for David Brooks as king of false equivalence.
No need for a venture capitalist 'friend'. Mom and Dad were executives at IBM, and their son- Stanford, Rhodes scholar, Yale Law, is following Obama's career path to a T.
Mayor-Governor-President Booker knows where campaign donations come from.You're right, Day. Unfortunately, this is politics and (as Molly might have said) you dance with them what brung ya.
Now, with corporate-sponsored elections (thanks to Citizens United), it can only get worse.
Since Booker brought up Rev.Wright,let's go there.This was and still is the biggest republican scam of the campaign.They hoodwinked the media including all of the news networks.Think about it.First they wrote up a fake document about Pres.Obama's relationship with Rev.Wright. Had a staffer leak it to the press.Every news organization picked it up,even citing exerpts from the fake document.Ricketts denied it Romney denounced it.Making him look like the reasonable one.They got free air time for their fake document,saving millions while replanting the seed of doubt about the Presidents time spent in Wrights church.And all the news media fell for it even the Rachel Maddow Show.
New Headline: Mayor Booker runs into burning home, supplies gasoline to arsonist.
The Ryan Budget championed by Romney follows the same script used by many private equity firms such as Bain.
Get control of a company. In this case elected President and get a majority in the House and Senate.
Maximize return to investors (his supporters/masters) by transferring all profits and revenues to them.
Recapitalize the company (usually) with debt. Drive up the federal deficit.
Try to make the company look profitable by reducing staff, salaries and cutting benefits. Cut Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Let more people fall through the safety nets.
Resell the company or let it file bankruptcy. Leave for the Carribean at the end of two terms. Let the next guy deal with the mess.
But this time he will not just take under a company as bad as that is. He will take under the United States throwing perhaps millions into poverty and destroy a country that has been the envy for most of the world for the past 200+ years. A Romney presidency has nothing to do with leadership. I don't really think he has the stomach for tough decisions. It is about what could be the ultimate prize for the darker practicioner of private equity capital: The take over and restructuring of a whole country!
Willard Romney says that the reason he is qualified to be President of the United States is because he knows how to take care of the economy and President Obama doesn’t.
He’s not saying that he had executive experience because he was the Governor of Massachusetts – something that he has completely run away from. Look at Willard’s campaign – it’s like his time as the Governor of Massachusetts just doesn’t exist.
He’s not running on foreign policy experience – remember the articles from last week about him ‘forming a foreign policy after the election’.
No. He’s staked his claim on why he should be President because he’s a rich White man, and the crux of that is Bain Capital.
I’m fine if he wants folks to judge him on his time at Bain Capital.
LET US DISCUSS HIS TIME AT BAIN.
Let us discuss the American workers that were given the shaft by Willard and Bain.
Let us discuss the fundamentals of how Bain made money. They weren’t about making jobs. They were about making money.
But, they don’t want to discuss that. They don’t want to talk about:
1. the jobs he shipped overseas
2. the companies he bankrupted
3. the people whose economic lives he ruined.
They wanna bullshyt and call that the President’s attempt at ‘character assassination’.
Just once I wish someone from the Obama campaign to retort – you’d actually have to HAVE CHARACTER in order for it to be assassinated, but I know they can’t.
It’s not character assassination to break it down to the American people that Willard and Bain didn’t give a rat’s ass about ‘creating jobs’. They were all about ‘ making money’. And, they rigged the game, so, whether the company succeeded OR FAILED – Bain made money.
The whole 99% vs. 1% isn’t about the 99% being ‘envious’. They just know unfair bullshyt when they see it.
People understand – if a company is doing successful, then yes, people should make money.
But, it’s hard to explain, in anything other than 1% ridiculousness, how, if you run a company INTO BANKRUPTCY, how your ass should walk away with MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.
And, that is EXACTLY what Willard and Bain did – time after time.
Time after time, bankrupting companies, walking away from the pension and medical benefit obligations of employees and retirees, while making MILLIONS for themselves.
On top of that, not only walking away from those worker and retiree obligations, but putting the AMERICAN TAXPAYER on the hook for them.
All while Willard – AND BAIN – walked away with MILLIONS.
THIS is why Bain is fair game.
Willard has said he should be President because of his ‘ business experience’.
Therefore, every inch of what was done at Bain is part of what the American People have a RIGHT TO KNOW.
See?
Was that so hard, Mayor Booker?
Why all of the ongoing references to Willard as part of the 1%???
Mittens is part of the 1/10 of 1%! The bottom end of the 1%ers are not his 'class' of people and he probably doesn't give a rat's @ss about them either.
Nice summary rikyrah.
Mitt Romney & Cory Booker of of the same ilk.
Both would toss their own mothers under a bus in order to get ahead and satisfy their own greedy ambition.
Romney trampled over middle class workers, stripping them of their jobs in order to make money for himself and for his investors. While Booker trampled over the President, selling him out in order to satisfy Wall Street types who invest in HIS campaign so that he can achieve his political ambitions.
What's worse is Booker attempts to make it look like he's taking the high road by not playing politics. He claims that he'll always put the nation ahead of politics. This is about as honest as Romney claiming credit for the auto industry bailout.
Booker showed his true colors on Meet The Press. Cory Booker has turned out to be a bigger disappointment than George W. Bush. Something I never thought I'd say in my lifetime.
Talk about 'nauseating'...Cory Booker is human Syrup Of Ipecac
If some one expresses a view you do not like- as apparently Mr. Booker did- then yes send him to the firing squad- just amazing for a country where we should enjoy free exchange of ideas- except as this blogg would imply- only ideas that Kim agrees with-
ST54 - the statement that only ideas that Kim agrees with appear in this blog is completely belied by the appearance of your asinine (repeated) comment here. The free exchange of ideas is one of the precepts this country was founded on, and it appears still to be in effect, because you've had the freedom to show your ass repeatedly.
Why do I suddenly want to know who the biggest Jewish Nazi enablers were?
I don't know why? Is this a non-sequitor or a trick question?
Steve - I don't think that a lot of Booker's constituents work in private equity. Those folks don't live in Newark.
Maybe Booker's constituency is private equity.
The problem with what Booker said is the same that the RNC and the Romney campaign say. 'Attacking Bain' is attacking the 'free market'. No. It is looking at what Bain DOES. If you want to run the US economy then we get to question what you have done that makes you QUALIFIED. Just being rich doesn't cut it. Why don't we ever talk about what happened when you actually GOVERNED in Mass.?
ok so what is your solution- make venture capital illegal?
No - the solution is to find someone in the mainstream conservative press who has the cojones to ask Willard why his (questionable) expertise at making companies more efficient has any bearing on his expertise at governing. Why is he able to dodge questions about how his stated position on issues seems to differ from his *demonstrated position on issues when he was the governor of Massachusetts?
More conflation issues:
Romney points to Bain as experience for job creation.
It was nothing of the kind!
Making jobs at Bain was completely incidental, never the goal.
If Bain made more money firing people, that's what it did.
That's FINE as far as market economics goes, but it is IRRELEVANT towards the job he's applying for. It is not a president's job to maximize GDP (corporate profits) at the expense of the citizenry (employees).
Oh, wait... my mistake.
That CAN arguably be the president's job.
Sorry, did I scare anyone?
Rikyah is totally spot on... If you haven't read her comment I suggest that you do...
Romney base his whole campaign on his experience at Bain during and after he left Bain...
He even when so far as to compare his record as "JOB CREATOR" against PBO record... So, the candidate box himself in... Now they trying their damnest to dodge, lie, and hide that big part of his record... Just like Romney is trying to runaway from his record as Gov. of MA.... And I applaud the Obama campaign for putting it out there...
Voters have a clear choice not a false choice... People who been complain about government, well PBO, is putting it out there... KNOW WHO YOU VOTING FOR...
It would be nice if all politicians would stop distorting the truth. But that is not going to happen until both sides end the negative campaigns. There is no reason for Obama to unilaterally disarm. Booker would do better to call for the end of superpacs, corporate and secret donations. He might want to add public financing for all elections to his agenda.
A few words about Booker...
I find it "Nauseating" that the only "Democrat" it seems that DAVID GREGORY can get to rebuttal Republican talking points on his conservative political program "Meet The Press" is CORY BOOKER !...
Where are the liberal and progressive "Democratic" voices of the party or is it that this "CLOSET REPUBLICAN" host DAVID GREGORY belives they do not exist ?...
I find it "Nauseating" that David Gregory is STILL hosting "Meet The Press"...
I also find it "Nauseating" that CORY BOOKER is positioning himself politicaly in order to become the next darling of the "WALL STREET" 1% , much like a CHUCK SHUMMER , or SCOTT BROWN !...
YES AMERICA , CORY BOOKER CAN SMELL ALL THAT GREEN CAMPAIGN CASH !....
Am I wrong in this assumption ?... I THINK NOT !...
A word of advice for CORY BOOKER !.. STOP CALLING YOURSELF A DEMOCRAT !...
Booker needs to either jump back into a burning building and stay there, or get on with polishing Christie's shoes, two jobs he's good at.
I think this guy is definitely eyeing higher office !.But to try and do it by bashing Obama ?. Has he even looked at the MILLIONS of dollars BAIN CAPITAL walked away with after shuting down these companies ?. And here he is trying to paint himself as the next "Compromiser" or "Uniter" ?.
GIVE ME A F**KING BRAKE BOOKER !. YOU SIR , ARE NO ROBERT KENNEDY !...
I find it EXTREMELY "Nauseating" that this guy calls himself a DEMOCRAT !...
Correct me if I am wrong !.. But , is'nt Newark New Jersey the CRIME CAPITAL of not only the United States but also the WORLD ?..
Hey Booker , before you criticize Obama , first make sure your own backyard is SAFE !
Am just saying dude !..
I think he has found himself between a rock and a hard place.He should have never broken bread with Christie, not this soon anyway. I don't think Christie is going to make it. He has too many sins that are piling up on him. He is making no attempt to remedy the situation he has found himself in. Pretty soon you'll see him start to develop the nervous laugh like Romney.
Until I have proof otherwise, I'm presuming that Mayor Booker was mistakenly assuming that private equity companies in general were being attacked. Which means he fell for the Republicans' trap, hook, line and sinker.
Risng star? Whoo boy!
With the Fed Fund Rate at .25%, it seems like we are grossly overpaying Wall Street for provideing liquidity,, and speculation.. Stop allowing leveraged positions and when you own a stock, you own it for at least a month. Having a socialized branch of banking has a nice ring to it..
So... will Rachel have Booker on her show tonight to talk about these comments?
Sorry, this is a big deal. It's indicative of the uselessness of the Dem party. Dems don't fight unless it's among themselves. An Obama surrogate goes on teevee and trashes his candidates message? That's a big deal and if the GOP did same, we'd all be laughing and crowing. Someone said it recently "Republicans are crazy. Democrats are stupid." This proves how true that is......
All good points but until you have been a victim of how Private Equity works it isn't pretty. I built a business by myself and my husband from our spare bedroom. We worked hard for 16 years and built it into a great company. Over 50 employees, got out of the bedroom with a SBA loan, and sold the company just over 2 years ago to a private equity firm.
During the sale process they lied to us as to what their intentions were. Offered me a top position in the new company and a four year contract. I agreed to sign a non compete for 5 years based on the calculation that after another 4 years I would want to retire anyways. I made plans and investments based on their assurances. We agreed to sales bonuses going forward that would add to my earnings and I was jazzed to be a part of this new company.
Within months of the purchase, they restructured the sales process and made it virtually impossible for me to reach the goals. Within six months, along with other upper management staff, I got my pink slip. They had no intention of honoring any of the assurances they made or fulfilling any of the agreements they made prior to purchase. They told me what I wanted to hear so I would agree to sell them the company.
With my noncompete I am unable to find work in my field at the level that I command, even though I had plenty of job offers, I had to turn them down. I am now looking for work and am unable to find anything outside of my field that is comparable in salary or experience.
Welcome to the reality of Private equity.
The only thing nauseating on this blog are those who think Obama has created any job.
He has not created ONE job.
He has created a job deficit.
And if you think job creation in government, (that's where most of the jobs he is taking credit for are) is a good thing you need a therapist.
The last thing we need are more government jobs and programs, if anyting we need to get rid of MOST OF THEM.. beginning with OBOMAS JOB.. 80% of Americans
cant wait to get rid of this idiot in November!
hmm saving all the jobs in the auto industry and the suppliers to that industry are government jobs? You might want to switch your news channel away from FOX you might learn there is a lot more going on than their unfair and imbalanced point of view.