Mitt Romney, man of mystery

stumbler · Oct 16, 2012

Romney Warned Against Pointing Fingers At Bush Administration After 9/11 Attacks

The Romney campaign has been hard at work attempting to blame President Obama for the terrorist attack that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. Lead foreign policy adviser Rich Williamson claimed the attack wouldn’t have happened in a Romney administration and Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan chalked it up to the “broader problem” of the current administration “projecting weakness.”

But at least one prominent Republican would object to the GOP’s efforts to politicize terrorism and his name is Gov. Mitt Romney.

During a 2004 National Press Club luncheon, Romney was asked to address the 9/11 Commission’s finding of serious intelligence failures on the part of the US government in the run-up to the attacks. He responded that it is easy, but ultimately not particularly helpful, to blame different parts of the government for the attack:

It’s very easy, it is extraordinarily easy to point fingers and say, ‘Why, this part of government knew this and it didn’t tell that part.’ And, ‘These people here haven’t learned that.’ Well, the reason those barriers exist is for legitimate purpose in a world that was pre-September 11th. And judging our intelligence by post- September 11th conditions is something we have to do carefully. We do that to help us get better, and to the extent we find criticism in the kind of work that I’ve had to do and others are doing, it should be focused on how we can make ourselves more effective in the post-9/11 world. But trying to judge what happened pre-9/11 by post-9/11 knowledge is probably not terribly fruitful.

Watch it:

Romney’s approach was consistent with then-President Bush’s, who when asked whether he should apologize for his administration’s failure to prevent 9/11, said simply “The person responsible for the attacks was Osama bin Laden.” Former National Security Adviser and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice told the 9/11 Commission something similar, saying “I know that there was no single thing that might have prevented that attack…I believe that the absence of light, so to speak, on what was going on inside the country, the inability to connect the dots, was really structural.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, by contrast, took a more concrete approach to accountability this Monday, saying “I take responsibility [for Benghazi]. I’m in charge of the State Department’s 60,000-plus people all over the world, 275 posts.”

While the Romney campaign has been routinely accusing the administration of deliberately misleading Americans on Libya, a detailed timeline of the events suggests that isn’t the case.
Click to expand...

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2...ers-at-bush-administration-after-911-attacks/

stumbler · Oct 16, 2012

OK if you want to check out the specifics of Mitt Romney's tax plan here ya go.

http://www.romneytaxplan.com/

stumbler · Oct 16, 2012

And the Mitt Romney campaign takes another hit from the fact checkers.

Mitt Romney’s ‘new math’ for jobs plan doesn’t add up

“Let me tell you how I will create 12 million jobs when President Obama couldn't. First, my energy independence policy means more than 3 million new jobs, many of them in manufacturing. My tax reform plan to lower rates for the middle class and for small business creates 7 million more. And expanding trade, cracking down on China and improving job training takes us to over 12 million new jobs.”

— Mitt Romney, “in his own words,” in a campaign television ad
Romney’s 12-million-jobs promise has garnered a lot of attention. We became interested in this ad after a reader asked whether the campaign had provided much detail on how he would reach this total. This television ad is also prominently featured on the Romney campaign’s “Jobs Plan” Web page.

The math here appears pretty simple: 7 plus 3 plus 2 equals 12. But this is campaign math, which means it is mostly made of gossamer. Let’s take a look.

The Facts
As we have noted before, the 12 million figure is not a bad bet by Romney. Moody’s Analytics, in an August forecast, predicts 12 million jobs will be created by 2016, no matter who is president. And Macroeconomic Advisors in April also predicted a gain of 12.3 million jobs.

In any case, four of Romney’s top economic advisers — R. Glenn Hubbard (Dean of Columbia Business School), N. Gregory Mankiw (Harvard professor), John B. Taylor (Stanford professor) and Kevin A. Hassett (American Enterprise Institute scholar) — co-wrote a white paper that lays out the case that Romney’s spending, tax and regulatory policies would yield a more robust recovery — adding 250,000 jobs a month — that would result in 12 million jobs over four years. The analysis, which is prominently posted on the Romney campaign Web site, concludes:

“If we had a recovery that was just the average of past recoveries from deep recessions, like those of 1974-1975 or 1981-1982, the economy would be creating about 200,000 to 300,000 jobs per month. By changing course away from the policies of the current administration and ending economic uncertainty, as proposed by the Romney plan, we expect that the current recovery will align with the average gains of similar past recoveries. History shows that a recovery rooted in policies contained in the Romney plan will create about 12 million jobs in the first term of a Romney presidency.”
But the specifics — 7 million plus 3 million plus 2 million — mentioned by Romney in the ad are not in the white paper. So where did that come from?

We asked the Romney campaign, and the answer turns out to be: totally different studies … with completely different timelines.
For instance, the claim that 7 million jobs would be created from Romney’s tax plan is a 10-year number, derived from a study written by John W. Diamond, a professor at Rice University.

This study at least assesses the claimed effect of specific Romney policies. The rest of the numbers are even more squishy.

For instance, the 3-million-jobs claim for Romney’s energy policies appears largely based on a Citigroup Global Markets study that did not even evaluate Romney’s policies. Instead, the report predicted 2.7 million to 3.6 million jobs would be created over the next eight years, largely because of trends and policies already adopted — including tougher fuel efficiency standards that Romney has criticized and suggested he would reverse.

The 2-million-jobs claim from cracking down on China is also very suspicious.

This figure comes from a 2011 International Trade Commission report, which estimated that there could be a gain of 2.1 million jobs if China stopped infringing on U.S. intellectual property rights. The estimate is highly conditional and pegged to the job market in 2011, when there was high unemployment. “It is unclear when China might implement the improvement in IPR protection envisioned in the analysis, and equally unclear whether the United States will face as much excess labor supply then as it does today,” the report says.

The Romney campaign has already used this study, in a misleading way, to claim that Obama’s China “policies cost us 2 million jobs.” Now the campaign has just taken the same figure and credited the claimed job gain to itself, even though the report does not examine any of Romney’s proposed policies.

“The big point is the 3+7+2 does not make up the 12 million jobs in the first four years (different source of growth and different time period),” Hubbard acknowledged in an e-mail.

The Pinocchio Test
This is a case of bait-and-switch. Romney, in his convention speech, spoke of his plan to create “12 million new jobs,” which the campaign’s white paper describes as a four-year goal.

But the candidate’s personal accounting for this figure in this campaign ad is based on different figures and long-range timelines stretching as long as a decade — which in two cases are based on studies that did not even evaluate Romney’s economic plan. The numbers may still add up to 12 million, but they aren’t the same thing — not by a long shot.

In many ways, this episode offers readers a peek behind a campaign wizard’s curtain — and a warning that job-creation claims by any campaign should not be accepted at face value. The white paper at least has the credibility of four well-known economists behind it, but the “new math” of this campaign ad does not add up.

As readers know, we tend to judge more harshly claims in prepared speeches or ads that were the result of considered discussion by political aides.

Clearly, some clever campaign staffer thought it would be nice to match up poll-tested themes such as “energy independence,” “tax reform” and “cracking down on China” with actual job numbers. We just find it puzzling that Romney agreed to personally utter these words without asking more questions about the math behind them.

Four Pinocchios

Click to expand...

CS natureboy · Oct 16, 2012

Could Obutthole be any more pathetic?:excited::excited::excited::excited::excited::excited:

Post debate and lies Column

By LEN TRIA, UNCOMMON SENSE | Hernando Today
Published: October 14, 2012
Updated: October 14, 2012 - 9:56 PM
» 33 Comments | Post a Comment
After his pathetic performance on Oct. 3, during the Presidential Debate, between President Obama and challenger, former Gov. Mitt Romney, Obama and his spin doctors are running around calling Romney a liar.
Why didn't President Obama call Romney a liar to his face, which would have been difficult, because he was looking down and not at Romney? It is a fact of life that when one is losing a debate or discussion resorting to name calling is a defensive tactic.
The public has now seen the man, who the brainwashed sycophantic press proclaimed as some kind of messianic messenger, as he really is without his teleprompter and giving long winded answers not usually germane to the question.
However, he is granted amnesty from his obtuse remarks by the loving media. Now the media is having second thoughts about their "messianic creation" because he came off in the debate as less than the "smartest man in the room" label that they had given him. He was swatted down after he began his untruthful remarks about Romney's tax proposal.
He cited a study that he claimed would cause a tax increase of some $2,000 on the middle class as rich people would get a big tax break. Almost as soon as the president finished his fact less statements the challenger retorted with an answer that completely destroyed the myth the president put forth. In fact the Princeton professor, Harvey Rosen, whose work was cited by President Obama told the Weekly Standard that the "Obama Campaign misrepresented his work."
How can that be from the "smartest guy in the room" to intentionally put forth a false accusation. Obviously he is not the smartest guy and now he is proving it for the world to see. By the way remember when the president invoked the name of the AARP claiming that they said Romney's plan "would weaken Medicare substantially" and they (AARP) supported Obamacare.
Well it didn't take long for the Senior Vice President, John Hishta, to respond that AARP has never consented to the use of its name by any political candidate or campaign and further that the American voter deserves better than campaign talking points. That begs the question who is really lying about their campaign assertions? How about what is the truth about the fiasco in Libya at our consulate in Benghazi?
The administration saw fit to send out our U.N. Ambassador, Susan Rice, to tell the country that the attack and the killing of our ambassador and three other Americans was a spontaneous act of violence. It turns out that the administration knew better and this was confirmed before the Sunday news programs but was not admitted to by our government.
As the days have progressed and more information is becoming public the failure of this administration is exposed for its ineptness. Requests for more security in Libya were turned down and our people were told to make do with what they had. Evidence to the military precision of the attack and the weapons involved make it abundantly clear this was an al-Qaida related operation.
Yet our President states that al-Qaida is back on its heels but reality tells us that is just plain not true…so much for liars and lying.
http://www2.hernandotoday.com/news/...1/haopino1-obama-exposed-as-a-liar-ar-532363/

CS natureboy · Oct 16, 2012

stumbler said: ↑

OK if you want to check out the specifics of Mitt Romney's tax plan here ya go.

http://www.romneytaxplan.com/
Click to expand...

Why don't you tell us about Obuttholes tax plan?

You seem to lie just as much as Obutthole anyway.......:excited::excited::excited:

CS natureboy · Oct 16, 2012

Then Stumbler can tell us all why Obutthole has been keeping HIS great tax plan a secret for the last 4 years????????????????????????

Hogarthjoseph100 · Oct 16, 2012

I'll just say this, if Romney wins the debate tonight, he will win the election.

stumbler · Oct 17, 2012

CS natureboy said: ↑

Why don't you tell us about Obuttholes tax plan?

You seem to lie just as much as Obutthole anyway.......:excited::excited::excited:
Click to expand...

Its right here parrot.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/taxes

stumbler · Oct 17, 2012

CS natureboy said: ↑

Then Stumbler can tell us all why Obutthole has been keeping HIS great tax plan a secret for the last 4 years????????????????????????
Click to expand...

And since I just did you'll prove yourself once more to be the brainwashed parrot I say you are.

lion12 · Oct 17, 2012

I've got one thing to say please vote Gary Johnson if u don't want to vote for him do vote for Obama.
Thank you

stumbler · Oct 17, 2012

lion12 said: ↑

I've got one thing to say please vote Gary Johnson if u don't want to vote for him do vote for Obama.
Thank you
Click to expand...

And I've got one thing to say to you; PLEASE DO. Vote for Johnson that is because every vote you take away from Mitt Romney is one more vote for President Obama.

lion12 · Oct 17, 2012

Again funny man u are yes Gary Johnson probably won't be elected although I wish he did but Obama is definitely better than that scum Romney, he such a sneaky person and can never answer a damn question without twisting it around

stumbler · Oct 17, 2012

lion12 said: ↑

Again funny man u are yes Gary Johnson probably won't be elected although I wish he did but Obama is definitely better than that scum Romney, he such a sneaky person and can never answer a damn question without twisting it around
Click to expand...

That's my impression as well but as long as you vote for Johnson that's cool with me. That will cancel out Romney votes and helps President Obama.

CS natureboy · Oct 17, 2012

stumbler said: ↑

Its right here parrot.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/taxes
Click to expand...

LMAO!!!!! That's nothing but a big bag of stupid Obama lies!!!!!!

O-douche bag doesn't have a clue. If he had, he sure hasn't shown it the last four years....

stumbler · Nov 15, 2012

Well the man of mystery has another thing to his credit. He's another sore loser lying "conservative."

The Final Insult: Mitt Romney’s Clueless Gift Gaffe

Mitt Romney made his final newsworthy post-election pronouncement, explaining to a conference call of big-dollar donors that he had fallen short because President Barack Obama had bribed liberal special interests with expensive gifts.

Here’s what he said, according to The New York Times:

“With regards to the young people, for instance, a forgiveness of college loan interest, was a big gift…Free contraceptives were very big with young college-aged women. And then, finally, Obamacare also made a difference for them, because as you know, anybody now 26 years of age and younger was now going to be part of their parents’ plan, and that was a big gift to young people. They turned out in large numbers, a larger share in this election even than in 2008 … You can imagine for somebody making $25,000 or $30,000 or $35,000 a year, being told you’re now going to get free health care, particularly if you don’t have it, getting free health care worth, what, $10,000 per family, in perpetuity, I mean, this is huge … Likewise with Hispanic voters, free health care was a big plus. But in addition with regards to Hispanic voters, the amnesty for children of illegals, the so-called Dream Act kids, was a huge plus for that voting group.”

Romney’s comments about his opponent’s “old playbook,” as he called it, again revived a dystopian scenario conservatives have been warning about since the New Deal, where Democrats “buy” a permanent majority and undermine democracy at the cost of the productive class. Using this old myth to explain his defeat illustrates again Romney’s disconnect from modern America. He views growing groups—young voters and particularly young women, and Hispanics—as outside special interests, and not as an essential part of the fabric of America.

And it shows the mind of a man who believes that everything is for sale—including, or especially, votes. This is consistent with what I always felt was the most accurate criticism of Romney: that he approached politics as a salesman, offering every group a different pitch. From that perspective, it’s easy to see how he could complain about government as a competing salesman, cobbling together constituencies with “gifts”—which sound perilously close to “bribes” in this context.

A final point: President Obama backing the DREAM Act or contraception coverage is not a nakedly political gesture, it is a matter of policy difference. Addressing the needs and desires of people is not a bribe or a government gift to be exchanged for a vote. It is part of the purpose of representative government as conservative forefather Edmund Burke himself once envisioned: “Government is a contrivance of human wisdom to provide for human wants. Men have a right that these wants should be provided for by this wisdom.”

Romney’s distance from this perspective about government shows how far the conservative conversation has drifted from original principles. His impulse to rationalize defeat as victory for liberal special-interest bribery shows again that it is probably best for the country that he was not elected president this November.
Click to expand...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...insult-mitt-romney-s-clueless-gift-gaffe.html

And now here's Louisiana governor who's already campaigning for 2016 throwing him under the bus for his political gain.

Bobby Jindal calls Romney’s ‘gift’ comments ‘absolutely wrong’

LAS VEGAS--Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal criticized former Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney on Wednesday for saying that he lost the 2012 election to President Barack Obama in part because Democrats promised "gifts" to minority groups, calling Romney's remarks "absolutely wrong."

According to The Los Angeles Times, Romney told donors on a conference call after the election that the Obama campaign "focused on giving targeted groups a big gift" and was "very generous" to ethnic minorities and young voters. Speaking to reporters here at an annual meeting of Republican governors, Jindal said such rhetoric could divide voting groups.

"I think that's absolutely wrong," Jindal said. "We have got to stop dividing the American voters. We need to go after 100 percent of the votes, not 53 percent. We need to go after every single vote. ... So I absolutely reject that notion, that description. I think it's absolutely wrong. I don't think that represents where we are as a party, where we're going as a party. That has got to be one of the most fundamental takeaways from this election."

Jindal, who is set to become chairman of the Republican Governors Association, has called on the party to reshape its tone when presenting ideas, especially to constituencies that traditionally vote Democratic.

"I'm passionate about it because I think it's extremely, extremely important," Jindal said. "This is just something that's fundamentally important for the future of our party."
Click to expand...

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/...nts-absolutely-wrong-014142107--election.html

ladygodiva123 · Nov 16, 2012

Re: Romney's gift comments - Yeah, I know that all those billionaires that donated millions aren't expecting anything in return. I got news for Willard, feeding the military industrial beast, corporate welfare, lowered tax rates and loosened regulations are "gifts" my friend, and they cost a hell of a lot more than food stamps.

bangmywife · Nov 16, 2012

Obama needs some changes

If obama continued with these policies ,he may ruin america

Log in or Sign up

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

CS natureboy Porn Star

CS natureboy Porn Star

CS natureboy Porn Star

Hogarthjoseph100 Sex Machine

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

lion12 Porn Surfer

stumbler Porn Star

lion12 Porn Surfer

stumbler Porn Star

CS natureboy Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ladygodiva123 Porn Star

bangmywife Amateur

Mitt Romney, man of mystery

Log in or Sign up

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

CS natureboy Porn Star

CS natureboy Porn Star

CS natureboy Porn Star

Hogarthjoseph100 Sex Machine

stumbler Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

lion12 Porn Surfer

stumbler Porn Star

lion12 Porn Surfer

stumbler Porn Star

CS natureboy Porn Star

stumbler Porn Star

ladygodiva123 Porn Star

bangmywife Amateur

Useful Searches