Nearly three months ago, President Obama was asked at a press briefing about the economy. "The truth of the matter is that, we've created 4.3 million jobs over the last 27 months -- over 800,000 just this year alone," he said. "The private sector is doing fine. Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government, oftentimes cuts initiated by governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help that they have in the past."
The political world ignored the context, went bonkers, and the Romney-Ryan ticket continues to reference the "doing fine" line just about every day as proof of, well, I'm not entirely sure. Apparently, we're supposed to think Obama's out of touch or something.
Last night, however, there was an unexpected twist -- Romney largely endorsed Obama's line.
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney appeared to parrot a line used by President Barack Obama that Romney has repeatedly targeted on the campaign trail.
Speaking at a fundraiser, Romney said that "big business is doing fine in many places," a remark that sounded similar to Obama's now infamous proclamation that "the private sector is doing just fine." [...]
"Big business is doing fine in many places," Romney said.
In context, any fair examination shows that Romney was trying to make a point about small businesses -- larger corporations are "doing fine," but more modest-sized enterprises are not. Obviously, everyone knows what he meant and the argument he intended to present. This need not be controversial.
But therein lies the rub: everyone also knows what Obama meant and the argument the president intended to present, but that didn't stop Romney from turning the out-of-context phrase into a major campaign offensive -- and then echoing the exact same sentiment.
In fact, Romney's comments are arguably worse, because he went on to say big businesses are "doing fine" because they can utilize "low tax havens around the world."
Really? Like stashing cash in the Caymans and creating shell corporations in Bermuda?
I don't know if Romney will become president next year, but I do know he's not an especially good candidate.
Leave a Comment:
Thanks Benen! I read the above and now I have Steeley Dan's Reeling in the Years stuck in my head, because the things Mitt finds precious I can't understand! -Kevo
It's simple enough, kevo. What he finds precious is his ego and the superficial adoration of multitudes. It explains why he lies without conscience and contradicts himself when the context makes it seem useful.
And the Mitster should know about a lot about low tax havens around the world!
When pols plead piety, there is usually something smelly going on. Did Romney participate in the IRS offered amnesty for tax evasion for holders of Swiss accounts or did he get a free toaster for opening it?
So Romney presents an opportunity for the left to address US tax policy on profits made overseas. They pay taxes to the host country, but the IRS wants to tax those after-tax monies yet again.
The net result? Big business sees no reason to repatriate cash to the US. Now, you all can pontificate about how unfair that is, or look at it like grown-ups and see that it's a very rational practice. The question is... would you rather change the system, or continue to whine?
Really Shooter , you people always sound like such wonderful experts on the subjects presented like this , how about you tell us all the tax rate wal mart pays in china , and then the tax rate they pay to bring it here ?
Or how about the tax rate paid in china to build the iPhone , then the tax rate they pay to bring it here and sell it ? you are claiming to know these tax rates , we are all ears , chop chop
http://www.pwchk.com/home/eng/prctax_corp_overview_taxation.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates
I'd like to know when the media is going to investigate Romney's investment of 75 million in Stericycle, an aborted fetus disposal company with ties to Planned Parenthood. Isn't that the real reason he won't share his tax returns with the American People?
Just one among many.
Sorry, Romney was gone by then.
@Shooter242: see David Corn's article in Mother Jones. Romney wasn't "gone" by then, according to SEC flings and many other documents he was still very much involved in decision-making at Bain, and personally profited from the Stericycle deal. The notion that a high-powered CEO would completely abandon his corporate responsibilities, the management of his money, and ignore the direction of a company he owned, is laughable.
One among many, for sure. I suspect he's also hiding the fact that he didn't really tithe.
HuffPost is running an article today that does conclude Romney was gone well before the first documentation of the company providing service to an abortion clinic. The article goes on that Romney and his wife continued to invest in the Bain fund that included Stericycle after the company began servicing abortion clinics. I think it would be a stretch to say the Romney's or any investor would know everything that's going on in the companies and subsidiaries that are included in their investment portfolio. Of the many things we can fault Romney for, I think this might be a weak argument.
Just saw Rob's post regarding the Mother Jones article which I'm reading know - may recant my previous post. (Is there a way to withdraw/edit once you've posted something here?)
Sorry, there is no retroactive editing function on this blog.
Okay, after reading the Mother Jones article, the timeline weakens the argument that ties Romney to Stericycle when it was providing service to the abortion clinic, via Bain. Mother Jones article states that Bain had sold all of its stock in Stericycle by 2004. HuffPost article says the first documentation of Stericycle servicing an abortion clinic is 2003. So, while Mother Jones makes a convincing case that Romney was still heavily involved in Bain business after 1999 and indicates very profitable investment from this connection, Bain's tie to Stericycle is severed within a year that the abortion clinic shows up on the books. I don't know why the stock was sold just on the heels of the abortion clinic becoming a customer, but I think the timeline weakens the Bain connection argument. And the HuffPost statement that the Romneys continued to invest personally in Bain which included the Stericycle funds, here again, both Mother Jones and HuffPost writes that Bain had those funds sold by 2004. So I think the timeline negates the argument.
(If this shows up twice - my apologies, user error!)
Let's just say Bain is a "blind trust" and Romney and Mann Romney have no idea what it does or what's in it. There, fixed the argument for ya.
Romney appears to have slipped and left the stream of alternative reality that his campaign usually operates in. How is this comment any different from what President Obama said a month ago? "Private" business is doing fine. Nearly 5 million new jobs have been crated since the recession., What conservatives don;'t understand is that cutting government spending is what will ultimately kill off our economy and lead to another recession -- or worse. Romney actually spoke the truth for once! - PP
but that didn't stop Romney from turning the out-of-context phrase into a major campaign offensive -
That seems to be the basis for the entire campaign.
They ain't got nothin'
On a somewhat related note, can someone tell me again why the financial bailout was such a bad idea?
http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/23/news/economy/federal-reserve-aig-bailout/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
The Republicans great idea of having guns on the streets for people to protect themselves was a real great idea wasn’t it? We are resorting back to the Wild West where everybody carries a gun and if you don’t like someone just shoot him or her dead. If the Republicans, including Jeb Bush, got any dumber about what happens when you really make stupid laws, it would be too shocking to see and it is already. Republicans wanting to get rid of or privatize Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Republicans wanting to remove the very rights of women. What other dumb things will the Republicans, extreme wealthy, and extremists of hatred be doing next?
These Republicans, extremists of hatred, and extreme wealthy talk about God and guns. But ever since Jesus came, it has never been about any form of violence or weapons, but is really about love, compassion, understanding, truth, and all the good things that come with love. These Republicans, extremists of hatred, and extreme wealthy have no right to even use God in reference with guns, since it is not Gods intent for any form of violence, thus these people are not living to even what it is to be a Christian, except a falsehood and lies. If anything these very people would be referred to as Anti-Christs, when it is in reference to Jesus.
Nobody will call him out. He lies and that is all you can say. He says whatever works at the moment for whoever he is talking to.
You might as well watch the weather report since it also changes everyday and is, unlike Romney, occasionally true.
I thought they needed tax havens...er...breaks so they can be the job creators that will save us all. Seems like they are just padding their bank accounts.That's fine. Stockpile money. Just don't piss on me and tell me that your trickle down fairy dust is really working.
Really big businesses (corporations) are doing more than super-fine.
On what grounds can they now morally turn around and criticize Obama for their success?
Why isn't TRMS covering Bain's investment in Stericycle and the income Romney's hiding from that investment (Stericycle disposes of "medical waste" including aborted fetuses)?
The problem is not prosecuting US banking giants on their mass fraud not Europe not bailing their banks out. Romney & Obama are sympatico w multi-national globalization and perpetuating the myth of continuous growth. Neither offer economic justice for the 99%. Obama is the Pres. of USA, Inc. and Romney wants to be CEO. Europe should sue the US for not jailing the banksters.
.Gov. Romney, Who's talking about Akin? Who's talking about "The Party of Legitimate Rape"? SURELY the Gov. isn't referencing the 3 DOZEN
protesters at his RECORD SETTING $2 MILLION fundraiser in the 49th poorest State in the USA on Wednesday night??? And, as Gov. Romney agrees, BIG Business, like BIG $$$ in these campaigns are "Doing Fine". I was glad to see him forcing Denver reporter to not submit questions about Akin or "The Legitimate Rape" of women comment, or its uderlying, jaw-dropping stupidity, either. Those ARE Akin's comments. The Gov.'s next opportunity to address the Oil & Natural Gas INDUSTRY'S legitimate rape of the beautiful Mesas of NM came the next day. Too bad the Gov. let THAT opportunity pass...under the BROILING Sun..across the WINDSWEPT plateaus... where they used to test NUCLEAR bombs.http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/archives/2012/08/22/protesters-welcome-romney
Just as a bit of backstory...ALL the Romney "supporters" wearing the "Legalize Freedom" tshirts, all FIVE of them (the ENTIRE contingent of NON-$2,500+/person Romney supporters) were A)NOT Arkansans AT ALL, B)Drove in for the event, and were scheduled for another one next day...for Pres. Obama, C)Sold Romney/Ryan buttons, and had Obama/Biden buttons for the asking. They're like carnies...in almost every respect.
Was I suppose to say that... Oops..
Rachel Maddow should have a segment on her show called, '
Let's Do the Math'"We have proof in Bain's tax returns Romney stayed longer at Bain then he said he did. His Firm's 2002 filings identify him as CEO, though he said he left in 1999. Romney had been part of a 1999 investment group that invested $75 million in Stericycle, a Medical-Waste Firm that disposed of ... Subtract 1999 from 2002 to see if Romney was at Bain when he invested $75 million in Stericycle."
Unfortunately, the first documentation of Stericycle providing service to an abortion clinic doesn't appear until 2003. Understand - I'm not looking to bail the guy out, but I don't see a case here.
Maybe? But Bain 's records shows otherwise.
Now for,
Lets Do the LogicYour tax returns are always for the following year/ 2003 tax returns would be for 2002.
"I don't know if Romney will become president next year, but I do know he's not an especially good candidate."
Now, that is the understatement of the year.
Flip-flopper. Let's see how fast the MSM will go after Romney for repeating exactly what Obama stated months ago about businesses doing fine which they are. They're cutting staff and pocketing the money. The remaining employees are working harder for less pay and picking up the slack of the employees that were laid off. Businesses are doing just great.
Rachael let me see if I can help with your thinking on this issue....
Now before I go on, I think you are one in a million and I will hopefully say why someday... Keep up the great Job. We are fans of yours.
Now, back to the issue of Romney Taxes… Can you conceive of the Republican electorate being the victim on this issue..?
Yes, you see they are committed to Romney as he is their (Republican) party nominee for presidency, therefore they cannot renege as they are stuck and will look bad if they do.
So you can somewhat feel bad for them as they at some point did sincerely expect Romney would have all of these sorted before this argument stated.
Therefore Rachael with majority of the country agreeing that Romney should release more of his tax returns, and Romney holding steadfast to his refusal of voluntary tax release compliance, you have to carefully think through the fact that the Republican Party is stuck.
How stuck you ask…?
For the Republican electorate, there is an underlying aura of betrayal of trust. Yes, Betrayal of Trust. The Republican electorate believed in Romney and the only way he can affirm the belief the Republican Party has in him is to release additional taxes, and the result will be see we told you he is alright, provided he is…
But he cannot, because I suspect like everyone else there are, even though legal, most likely scathing information in his taxes…
So, the Republican Electorate is stuck. Really stuck and you have to feel bad for them because their underlying suspicion, which they will not openly admit publicly, is that the suspicion just might be true…
Wow!
Mr. Romney is probably referring to his small business experience as a mortgage lender.
It appeared this eve that rachel thinks we would be better off as a nation with fewer rich people?
Not fewer rich people- fewer ultra-rich people that throwing a billion dollars to a campaign means nothing in the short run, but big bucks in the long run.