A key part of Mitt Romney's strategy in last night's debate was to shift the focus away from foreign policy -- even in the debate devoted to foreign policy -- and onto the economy. There was, however, one problem with the tactic: Romney is wrong about domestic issues, too.
By some measures, one of the most contentious exchanges of the night was over President Obama's successful rescue of the American auto industry.
The dispute was pretty straightforward: Obama said to Romney, "You were very clear that you would not provide government assistance to the U.S. auto companies even if they went through bankruptcy. You said that they could get it in the private marketplace. That wasn't true."
Romney said in response, "You're wrong," three times. The Republican concluded, "People can look it up."
What a good idea.
In a debate in which many of the disputes are subjective, it's nice to have an argument in which there's an objective truth. Romney told viewers last night that his position was that American auto makers "can get government help and government guarantees" as part of the bankruptcy process.
Depending on how generous one is inclined to be, this is either a lie or a stunning case of "Romnesia."
Jonathan Cohn, who's done some great reporting on the auto rescue in recent years, noted Romney's condemnation during the Republican primaries of using public funds for the industry. Here's what Romney said during a debate in late 2011:
"My view with regards to the bailout was that whether it was by President Bush or by President Obama, it was the wrong way to go. I said from the very beginning they should go through a managed bankruptcy process, a private bankruptcy process. We have capital markets and bankruptcy. ... My plan, we would have had a private sector bailout with the private sector restructuring and bankruptcy with the private sector guiding the direction as opposed to what we had with government playing its heavy hand."
As a substantive matter, this didn't make any sense -- capital markets were frozen at the height of the crisis, and the money simply wasn't there. It was either the government or nothing. Last night, Romney argued the opposite of his position, saying he supported auto makers getting "government help."
By any measure, this isn't just a flip-flop; it's failing to tell the truth about a flip-flop.
And in terms of political salience, all of this only serves as a reminder to the nation -- most notably some folks in Ohio -- that if Romney had his way, the American auto industry would have collapsed, waiting for private investment that would have never come.
Leave a Comment:
Yes, but- there a few Low Information Voters out there who do not read this marvelous blog, so what they heard last night from Mitt will just be another case of Romnesia.
No, it appears that nearly half the voters are low information and they didn't hear another case of Romnesia, they heard Mitt set the record straight and call out Obama on his lie; in their alternate reality, of course.
They will not look it up.
You saw what happens when 17 of his 24 foreign policy experts are from the W regime. You have nothing but bankrupt Paul Wofowitz type policies that do nothing to keep the world safer. I believe that a second O admin. will tackle the Palestinian question; it has to be done, and he is the one to do it!
Curses! Foiled again by that dreaded "alternate reality"! Blame it on Douglas Adams.
More like Supercalifragilistic blog.
Funny every time a liberal would say that Romney wanted to let Detroit go bankrupt Robby and Shooter would be on this blog lickity-split to talk about how that wasn't what Romney said! Romney said let them go through a private sector, managed bankruptcy that didn't involve the government! Then the conversation would devolve into liberals talking about the lack of capital and conservatives talking about how the free market always does it better.
I am shocked that they aren't on here deriding Romney for changing positions and now disagreeing with them about the value of the free market and instead advocating for a government bailout. Odds are they won't be outraged at the hypocrisy and they won't post here. As I've always said they just ignore the times they're wrong, never apologize, and just keep repeating the same mantra.
The next time someone brings up the let Detroit go bankrupt conversation- remember their silence =P
Still playing the semantics game on low information Democrats? Tsk. In this case both parties are right....
This is a perfect example of Obama's socialist leanings, of which Americans have had enough.
Dumbass242,
You know full well that Romney advocated a private managed bankruptcy, so not the same. Obama was not involved in the bankruptcy process. Creditors always get stiffed in a bankruptcy and GM was not nationalized or handed over to the unions. How can GM have been both nationalized and handed over to the unions; if it's one it's not the other, however, it's neither. The government became a shareholder and loaned money to GM, GM is not a municipal vehicle manufacturer with government employees and management appointed by the Obama administration. How many "nationalized" companies are listed on stock exchanges?
Everyone knows "low information" refers to Fox watchers and republican internet trolls. Any one who spouts "Government Motors" in a discussion of GM epitomizes low information.
Think of the worst Football, Baseball or Hockey team ever......No matter what their record...there will always be Die Hard Fans that love them to Death and back them no matter what.....the problem is in this case, that Death will be our economy.
Here we go again. And there goes another paycheck to shooter for telling lies. Your an idiot.
I guess it depends on what the meaning of government help is. In his OpEd piece, he did state that he'd be OK with government guarantees and that maybe structured bankruptcy is what needs to happen. But two other places in the op ed he did say they should not just get a check.
He said in the last debate that they should have went bankrupt, that they did a structured bankruptcy which is what he said they should do.
Honestly I don't know what to make of the exchange.
Credit markets were seized up. Only the government had the funds and the willingness to lend them money until they could recover. Obama did not 'write them a check' he made them a loan. And they are repaying it. Romney is a total sleazebag.
Melanie: you forget one small detail. There was no private company that had enough capital to bring the company out of a managed bankruptcy; only the government could afford to do that. Look it up. I think Willard was looking to gut the unions, so he could outsource GM to china............
This is when you take a good long look at Romneys' record. There probably is no other Presidential candidate in our History who has made up things, and pandered so much as Romney does. That's not good, that's very, very bad. He's a bad man, ask his dog . Look into his eyes, if you can find them. He's the Uncle who wouldn't let you listen to Neilson Schmeilson because it had a few curse words in it.
Lesman...I'm not forgetting anything LOL I'm pointing out what was said in the op ed and trying to figure out what he meant there and what Obama was trying to say last night. I'm not arguing for Romney or against Obama right now.
Obama was focusing on whether Romney approved of government help. He did approve of government guarantees. How does each man define government help? It doesn't matter much if it was not possible. Romney can still say that he said he approved of that kind of government help. Maybe Obama would have been better served to point out that the private sector wasn't giving anyone money for anything ?
I don't think this is a home run for either of them.
Angel77...I've listened to Romney flip flop and lie for well over a year. So, no worries there. He's shown that he'll whore himself out shamelessly. No thanks.
Oh, the op ed piece was what was in contention specifically. That's where Obama went, so that's what I read.
Romney is a liar. He is trying to sow just enough 'doubts'...as he lies NOW he will just turn around if he wins and say 'I ALWAYS said that...' and sure enough at SOME time he probably said 'it'. I am dispirited that a candidate for President can be such a liar and have such low regard for the voters that he will say anything...ANYTHING and his spinners will try to show him as 'presidential'.
Some say Romney is a liar, some say Obama is a liar. Either way, Romney had a proven record of economic recover and Obama has a record of making our economy worse. It's not all his fault, his democratically controlled house and senate helped him along the way during his first two years in office. They passed legislation that has kept Americans from working. His own democratically controlled house and senate didn't approve any of his budget proposals because they were bad and they were not what he told us when he was campaigning. It's time for change.
Robme lied, tried to cover his lie with something he pulled from up his sleeve hoping that voters wouldn't remember/notice/look up and then he got a bit testy because he was pointed out and corrected! That's not "leadership", that's an over indulged rich, spoiled brat that's used to bullying and getting his way! WE did that with Shrub, now it's time to move forward, next!!
Robme has shown neither character, leadership, a moral compass, nor compassion for others; and while his faith may be comforting to him - once again I have to wonder about these people that "wear their faith on their sleeves" because they surely aren't abiding by those core principals in their everyday life!
Zora, this will not be the first time a politician has hid behind faith and capitalism to to Rape, Rob and Gut the Free Market System.....it happens everyday.....Some would even say....It's The American Way. Look at Europe...following our lead....and look where it has gotten them.
I know that it's not, but at what point can I say "PASS"! At what point are these religuluous hypocrites going to stop with the "shock & awe" G-d speak and actually use the intelligence that their maker gave them! At what point, how long must we continue to allow the rampant avarice, thoughtlessness, selfishness, looting & polluting 1% of our country to be the puppet masters for the people that supposedly represent US - at what point can we say "NO MAS"!!
Just give me a date certain. I'm tired of ignorant, stupid, simple-minded low information reich-wingers destroying our nation, pitting brother against brother til we all turn on each other as they walk away having picked our pockets!
The president used the 'romnesia' line today on the stump, after last nights debate, and he told the crowd that he doesn't hope that they catch it..... The truth doesn't bend like a bendy straw. Willard looked like a venture capitalist that did not know anything about foreign policy, nothing more, nothing less, and that's the truth! (apologies to Artie Johnson!)
Romney's solution, with regards to Detroit, was a misguided attempt to save the auto industry, not a corporate mercy killing. Misrepresenting his position while intentionally misquoting him has served us dems well and may win us this election. But we misrepresented his position on the auto crisis.
Where's the misquote?
You are incorrect about us misrepresenting his position. he wanted Chrysler and GM to go through a real bankruptcy, which would have shed them of most of their structural debt and dumped the pension liability on the stoop of the government. None of that was workable. He now knows that and is trying to re-write his own history and trust that the voting public is too stupid to know the difference.
The NYT's Op-ed title was not only a mischaractarization of the Governor's position, it's been incorrectly attributed to him by a slew of Democratic surrogates.
Allowing Detroit work out its problems through a 'managed bankruptcy process' intended to save the auto industry is not the same as throwing it off a cliff cause you're a cold hearted capitalist bastard.
Look, as a knuckle dragging Democrat I have no problem with the sophistry. Believing it is where I draw the line.
He actually DID dump the UAW workers, and their pensions, and profited from it....
http://www.gregpalast.com/mitt-romneys-bailout-bonanza/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwG_sBQU7OQ&feature=plcpI
So Goes GM So Goes America. This prevails. There was not enough money in the public sector to handle the recovery. Besides, Romney was one of the Hawks that made millions through Delphi. How come Romney keeps saying he is going to create jobs and the next sentence is to bash The President and say that Government doesn't create jobs ? I have not felt at anytime that the President wasn't in control of a changing political world and after hearing Romney's parrot of how he would follow The Preisdent's policies I get some comfort, for what ever its worth. Glad to see Mr Romney is onboard, pun intended.
I find it funny that Romney swears up and down that the government doesn't create jobs, then promises that he can create jobs if we elect him, all while asking us to employ him at a government job. Romney actually made some sense in parts of the debate last night. Unfortunately, he was just regurgitating Obama's opinions. Does this man have any ideas of his own? Seems like the man just says whatever he thinks the audience wants to hear. He lacks principles and honesty, and it disappoints me that the American people even take him seriously at all.
and he's a hypocrite, who has profited personally from the demise of the auto industry ;
Rachel will hopefully pick up on this story before the election....
http://www.gregpalast.com/mitt-romneys-bailout-bonanza/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwG_sBQU7OQ&feature=plcpI
http://truth-out.org/progressivepicks/item/12273-romney-company-shipped-every-single-delphi-uaw-job-to-china
In Romney's defense, in the "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" piece he wrote, he did advocate for government loan guarantees ... for POST-bankruptcy financing... way at the end of the article. The real problem with that is he's taking both sides of the issue then choosing which side is unaffected by his Romnesia based on the situation.
I suppose Mr. Mittens believes that if he states every position humanly possible, he'll somehow cover his bases of "Like I said..." Sigh... I guess the "broken clock is right twice a day" philosophy is now a political strategy.
My instincts suggest that had the government offered post bankruptcy guarantees and finance then companies - Bain Capital in particular would have helped GM to restructure and then bleed billions from the government. In the UK the Rover car company was sold for the princely sum of 1 British pound, yes one pound to some "investors" who made the right noises about restructuring and keeping the company going. They demanded millions from the government in help and grants and then shortly after that they sold the company to the Chinese and walked away with millions themselves. Romney's "OP-ED" was nothing but the first attempt to convince the government that they should offer similar terms.
Ok, this is a little off topic from the stimulus/auto rescue part of the debate but I don't see a discussion about the topic of our relation with Iran and Israel. Both Romney and Obama agreed that they would stand by Israel if they were under attack as their ally and per their agreements and treaties along with their mutual agreement to continue to hold to their sanctions and pressure on Iran to keep them from reaching nuclear weapon ability. Both candidates said they would 'have Israel's back and support'. The part that disturbs me is when the moderator asked the next question. He asked to the best of my memory 'If the Prime Minister of Israel called and said we are preparing and organizing for an attack on Iran, what would you do?' Romney completely avoided the question and said he wasn't going to get into hypotheticals. However, this is a real possibility. This is an example of that '3am call test' and Romney completely failed by saying that it would never get to that point and other interactions would happen leading up to that point but it is an actual possibility. For example if Iran attacked Israel it would show cause for retaliation with the immediate support from the US as both candidates stated they would do. This was an opportunity to put an action plan to his previous promise of support. He did not even have to go to any crazy extremes and say 'I would launch nuclear missiles at Iran'. A simple - immediately gather the appropriate staff such as the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, National Security Advisors, Joint Chiefs, etc where they could work together to devise to best way to support Israel with communication and collaboration with the Prime Minister and also bring in other Allies in the area.
His response shows a complete fail of the 3am test. He could not even come up with a simple answer that anyone that has watched a movie involving military/war/politics could have a more educated response other than 'I won't play hypotheticals'. These hypotheticals are what a Commander in Chief has to think about whenever there is an ongoing threat to national security because he never knows when something unexpected such as a tragedy in Benghazi. Gauranteed the President does not get much sleep every year when 9/11 approaches; however he does know the proper channels to go through when something does happen. Romney seems to think delegation and letting others figure it out is the best way 'bipartisanly' but they offer options and he has the ultimate decision. I don't think he has the ability to make those tough decisions when he can't even make up his mind on very simple policies that would seem obvious such as the act for Equal Pay for Equal Work Act.
I agree. That was maddening. "Well, that just won't happen because we'll be talking to Israel".
"I'll kick the can and hope that never happens because if it does, I don't know what the hell I would do" is what I take away from that.
Well said. Hypotheticals are important methods of determining which of several "solutions" would best be applied. Mittens doesn't know what he would do other than kick the can down the road and let someone else deal with whatever mess is at hand. He has absolutely no foreign policy whatsoever. His foreign policy team consists mainly of Bush's cronies and we all know where they got us. He is such a loser and I cannot understand how he ever got the nomination. He is going to owe his masters big-time for all the money they have thrown into this race.
It's clear to me that Romney meant a Bain-style takeover of the auto companies in which the workers would be fired, the resources stripped, and the workers rehired without a union and at lower pay. Then there would be a bare bones production run with government money when they were again about to fail. There would not have been the money to redesign products for fuel efficiency, modernization, quality-control, etc. which has been the saving grace of the reborn auto industry. And the middle-class union jobs would have been gone (a goal in itself for the right).
I wish the President would make more of the fact that Mr. Romney is continuing to this day to profit personally from the auto industry bailout by virtue of his Bain investments in Delphi. Please read the Nation Magazine's article this week on the "Bailout Bonanza" and how Romney is continuing to profit from it and from Delphi's movement of their production to China.
Hopefully this will come up in Ohio in ads or stump speeches
http://www.thenation.com/article/170644/mitt-romneys-bailout-bonanza
GM is becoming China Motors
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo
The auto bailout saved the unions and threw the investors under the bus. It also cost Americans $50 billion dollars which we will probably never see. GM isn't paying any taxes now and the stock we own as citizens is at half its value.
American Airlines Is Thriving Despite Bankruptcy
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/06/15/american-airlines-is-thriving-despite-bankruptcy
Most people simply don't realize that the bailout of GM wasn't a bailout of the company. It wasn't a bailout of its shareholders, who lost everything... or its bondholders, who lost almost everything. Where did the money go? To the union. The United Auto Workers (UAW) ended up with all the money.
Rad fact check, it went out of the way to claim obama was wrong on this.
I am going to put my tin hat on but some thing dose not sound right in Romneys camp on Libya.
Romney comes across as one of those flip books from decades ago... the ones where you fold the edges of the pages back and then release them in sequence and the drawings - each slightly different from the one before and the one after - make it appear that there is motion. Romney has no consistency and there is no real motion toward or away from anything. Just moments in time that are disconnected and leave American voters without any clear picture of what he stands for or against... except he feels entitled to be President of the US. This was very clear in the debates. There appears to be no real person behind the candidate called, Mitt Romney. Since he has no strong connection to any of those snapshots in time, he cannot point to them with authority and say, "This is what I stand for!"... the auto buyout is one such saga. Romney has said a lot of things that sound like he would not have followed the same path that Obama followed in saving the US auto industry, but he thinks that he has sufficiently outlined what he would have done differently... except that each iteration is slightly different and expresses a different point of view... until I don't really know and could not really pin down WHAT he would have done. The only thing that Gov. Romney has clearly shown to me is that my vote for President Obama was the right one.
Wow, I never knew that the truth was like a taffy pull. It can be stretched and stretched and shaped into anything you want. Good work Mitt! (sarc)
Romneys whole stategy now seems to be flip flopping on his hard right issues to satisfy the centre, cosying up to Obama and to take credit for his successes and hope nobody notices that he has no solid position, no backbone and not one iota of credibility. I guess he thinks he can lie in the debates and enough undecided voters will not check the facts and assume a man running for POTUS will be decent enough not to lie to the American public, and how wrong they'd be. He is guaranteed 100% Republican suppprt of course. Hard to see anyone changing their mind and voting for Obama when getting him out of office is the ONLY agenda the Republican party has pursued in the last 4 years, to the detriment of the American people once again. Shame on them and their pathetic excuse for a candiadate as the leader of the free world.
So agree with you Steffan. If this country is so short sighted as to elect this man without a core, who many firmly agree wants the title, & is willing to be the man with enough digits to sign their far right agenda into law, it would be rewarding the obstructionists who put our country in even a worse place & refused to help with recovery. How that is acceptable defies reason. It is inviting disaster, hoping beyond hope more do not accept that premise.
Romney profited greatrly from the auto bailout
The demise of GM's DELPHI -
Paul Singer's hedge-fund (inc. blind-trust money from the Romneys) closed 28 factories, moved them to China, fired all 25,000 UAW workers, moved Delphi corporation overseas.
Used the remaining factory to blackmail shutdown of GM and Chrysler....
The result; increasing the value of their investment from .67/share to 22.00/share
12 billion in profit, on the taxpayers' dime - BRILLIANT!!!
http://www.gregpalast.com/mitt-romneys-bailout-bonanza/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwG_sBQU7OQ&feature=plcpI
Rachel -
You have GOT to break this story BEFORE the election -
This is the OCTOBER Surprise that will seal the fate of Romney and expose his hypocrisy
www.gregpalast.com/mitt-romneys-bailout-bonanza/
Its a little off topic, but I also wonder if anyone else noticed Romneys admission that his economic plan will take 8-10 years, but yet he has said over and over again what a failure Obama has been in his first 4 years. I hope America allows Obama the grace of 8-10 years to begin to clean up this mess from the last 20 years!!
He's getting away with it again. There are many topics on which we could and should hold substantive debate in order that we may make informed decisions. But the current Republican party doesn't want anything like substantive debate so they blow smoke and bang cow bells to keep your attention from the old guy behind the curtain.
They are spending our tax dollars to deprive Americans the right to vote. As the nominated leader of his party, if Romney genuinely believed in the basis of American ideology, "...all men are created equal...", he would be leading the fight to stop his party's efforts to disenfranchise US citizens. He doesn't so he isn't.
Romney made tons of money as a result of the bailout(gov Loan), but he would have made even more money had the auto industry gone through normal Chapter 11 process. This process takes a lot of time and jobs would have been lost. Going through that process at a time where the whole market was in collapse prohibited to get any serious investors to succeed. When chapter 11 fails, the company is liquidated. Romney would have made Tons more money from the failure. And who cares about saving jobs and promote USA manufacturing in his view it's just collateral damage. Like he is doing at this very moment shipping a company to China in Freeport, IL.
First paragraph from 'Let Detroit Go Bankrupt':
"IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed."
Last paragraph from 'Let Detroit Go Bankrupt":
"In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check."
No gray areas there. Romney got it dead wrong. So, to see him try to argue last night that he was right all along was quite the spectacle. Romney came off looking nuts.
Anybody wonder if Romnesia is a precursor of Alzeimer' s and we're looking at real Ronald Reagan lookalike? When did his disease really start and how many of his policies were affected by it? Should we really hold him up as as a brilliant leader or a disillusional former actor.