Friday, July 13, 2012

More lies our President is telling us

What’s New Today

Story #1 tells of the Boston Globe’s hit job on Romney and refutes it.  #2 looks at these charges not from what it says about Romney but what it says about Obama.  #3 has us learning that at least in some black circles, Obama is no longer accepted as black, but as a mixed race person.  #4 is about the NAACP convention and racism.  #5 looks at a new story on voter fraud.  #6 has Obama admitting to his biggest failure while #7 has polls that say the Obamacare decision at the Supreme Court will end up hurting Obama. 

Today’s Thoughts

We are hearing from the liberal press that Romney is simply too rich and successful to be president.   If being successful disqualifies you, Obama is the perfect candidate.

One Presidential candidate has put HIS money in Swiss Bank Accounts, while the other candidate has put OUR money in Greek economics.  Who’s the smarter one? 

The charges that Romney was still running Bain Capital until 2002 have been given three Pinocchios by the right wing Washington Post.  BTW, three Pinocchios is defined as having “significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions.”

The official numbers are out from NCDC, and it turns out that the record hot June of 2012 was cooler than 1933, 1918, 1952, 1931, 1934, 1911 1936. and a number of other years. And this was after they adjusted the temperatures upwards by more than a degree!'

1. Boston Globe and Obama Campaign charges crash

Mitt Romney did not manage Bain Capital's investments after leaving to run the Salt Lake City Olympic Games, according to confidential firm documents obtained by Fortune.
The timing of Romney's departure from Bain became a lightning rod earlier today, when The Boston Globe published an article suggesting that Romney remained actively involved with the firm longer than he and his campaign have claimed. The sourcing is largely SEC documents that list Romney as Bain Capital's CEO and sole shareholder through 2002 -- or three years after Romney officially left to run the Salt Lake City Olympic Games.

These claims are very similar to ones made last week by David Corn in Mother Jones, which we disputed at the time.

Now Fortune has obtained new evidence that supports Romney's version of events.

Bain Capital began circulating offering documents for its seventh private equity fund in June 2000. Those documents include several pages specifying fund management. The section begins:
Set forth below is information regarding the background of the senior private equity investment professionals of Bain Capital. Also listed are certain investment professionals responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Brookside and Sankaty funds, which are affiliated funds of Fund VII.

It then goes on to list 18 managers of the private equity fund. Mitt Romney is not among them. Same goes for an affiliated co-investment fund, whose private placement memorandum is dated September 2000.

Then there is Bain Capital Venture Fund -- the firm's first dedicated venture capital effort -- whose private placement memorandum is dated January 2001. Romney also isn't listed among its "key investment professionals," or as part of its day-to-day operations or investment committee.
All of this could prove problematic for the Obama campaign, which has spent the day crowing over the Globe story (going so far as to hold a media call about it).

"When Mitt Romney ran for governor and now as he's running for president, he consistently claimed he could not be blamed for bankruptcies and layoffs from Bain investments after February 1999 because he departed for the Olympics," said Obama spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter, according to the Globe. "Now, we know that he wasn't telling the truth."

But the contemporaneous Bain documents show that Romney was indeed telling the truth about no longer having operational input at Bain -- which, one should note, is different from no longer having legal or financial ties to the firm…

This is one of those bad mistakes a political campaign makes.  Obama’s campaign making a serious charge which is almost immediately discredited makes their veracity questionable and provides the Romney Campaign with cover for future charges.  It is a sign of desperation by the Obama.

2.  Obama reveals the Content of his Character

Obama campaign’s desperate “felony” charge against Mitt Romney ought to serve as a wake-up call for the Romney campaign and for the American public regarding the utter amorality of the president and his functionaries. Although the jejune Boston Globe story was quickly debunked (see above), that of course won’t stop them from pounding home the Big Lie that Romney continued to run Bain in 1999 while he was saving the Winter Olympics as long as it’s useful and “fits the narrative.” Here’s why:
  1. All’s fair in love and war — so what if the charge is untrue?
  2. No one will remember it next week anyway, least of all:
  3. The protective media, which will give Barry & Co. a pass. Because, hey, see points one and two above.
The larger issue is the willingness — indeed, the enthusiasm — of the administration to tactically lie at this point in the campaign, smear the opposition, and demand the release of more documents in effort to keep Romney on the defensive.

As Victor has pointed out, this is chutzpah on steroids coming from a man about whom we still know next to nothing.  Except the content of his character, which grows increasingly clearer and more distressing day by day…

Obama has gone desperately negative very early in the campaign.  How long will it be before the public starts to be repelled by the stench of his charges?  Obama is not helping his chances with this kind of nonsense.  Finally, if the outsourcing happened after Romney left Bain than it would be his successors who would be “guilty” of outsourcing and from what I’ve read these people are Democrats and contributors to the Obama campaign.

3.  Obama our half white president

Last Friday, while on Michel Martin's NPR show, "Tell Me More," Hollywood titan Morgan Freeman informed his host that, contrary to the prevailing wisdom, Barack Hussein Obama is not America's first black president.

He is the country's "first mixed-race president."  The first black president, Freeman continued, has not as yet "arisen."

So, one wonders, whence stems the popular misconception that Obama is black?  Freeman has an answer ready at hand: the president's opponents.

Obama's rivals want to fuel the flames of racial bigotry by emphasizing his African ancestry while ignoring his white background.  Yet they conveniently "forget that Barack had a mama" who "was white, very white American, Kansas, middle of America."

Some commentators, particularly those on the right, think that Freeman's remarks should have been met with more outrage.  I personally think that incredulity is a more fitting response.

At the 2009 White House Correspondents' Association dinner, the black comedian Wanda Sykes quipped that while she was "proud" that she could characterize Obama as "the first black president," her pride would endure only as long as he didn't "screw up."  Once that happened, however, then she would be asking: "What's up with the half-white guy?"

It is difficult indeed not to think that Freeman -- a long-time Democrat and supporter of the president -- isn't animated by the same impulse over which Sykes joked….

One of the things that have motivated BHO in growing up was his being called an Oreo by blacks.  It appears he is back to being called that again.

4.  Pandering:  A Democratic tradition

Campaign politics is all about pandering. You can’t expect a candidate to show up to talk anything but drivel when his survival is on the line.

But not always. Mitt Romney showed up this week in Houston to speak to the annual convention of the NAACP. Some people thought he was brave; others that he was merely foolish and wasting his time.

The stage was set for a Republican calamity. Earlier in the week, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. delivered a race-baiting speech that would have done a Democratic pol in the Old South proud. He put the crowd surging into the aisles, howling their appreciation.

He defended the Justice Department efforts to block laws in more than 30 states to require voters to show some sort of identification before getting a ballot: “The arc of American history has always moved toward expanding the electorate. It is what has made this nation exceptional,” he said. More rafter-raising cheers from the delegates (who were required, by the way, to show ID to get into the hall).

The attorney general likened voter-identification requirements, enacted to prevent unqualified voters from stuffing ballot boxes with illegal votes, to the Jim Crow-era requirement in most Southern states to pay a poll tax (usually a dollar) to cast a ballot .Mr. Holder, a lawyer, was clearly basing his comparison on hearsay evidence. Voter-ID is required in many states a long way from Dixie, and it’s nothing like a poll tax. The usual forms of identification a driver’s license, an employer’s identification is all that is required in states with voter-ID laws, and, as in Texas, where the Justice Department is at the moment in court attacking the requirement that the states provide an identification card for free….

… Others in the media chorus quickly picked up the theme. Lawrence O’Donnell of cable-channel MSNBC called the Romney speech part of a “Southern strategy” to appeal to “racial and racist voting.” One of the O’Donnell guests accused Mr. Romney of being “culturally ignorant” for describing a black colleague as having served in his “kitchen cabinet,” or inner circle of advisers, when he was the governor of Massachusetts. “To talk about being in the kitchen and not talk about an African-American actually being in your Cabinet is really not a good metaphor to use with African-Americans.”

Kitchen Cabinet is a racial slur???  This goes along with the DC employee who was fired to mentioning a niggardly policy.  Ignorance should not be tolerated much less rewarded.  Anyone who takes talking of someone being in his kitchen cabinet as a slur is ignorant and when a newsperson subscribes to that being acceptable he shows himself to be a partisan fool.

5.  Voter Fraud:  It’s a Democratic tradition

A Democrat candidate for City Council in 2009 took the witness stand today in the ballot fraud trial of former City Councilman, Michael LoPorto.  Robert Martiniano testified that forging absentee ballots is a tradition in upstate New York amongst both parties, but that he had no idea it was occurring to his and LoPorto's benefit in the Working Families Party primary in 2009.

Forging absentee ballots is a tradition in the Collar City and other upstate cities, but a former Democratic candidate testified Thursday that he didn't know it was occurring in the 2009 Working Families Party primary.

"It's was something that was just in the culture for both major political parties," said Robert Martiniano, who was an unsuccessful Democratic candidate for the City Council's 2nd District.

Martiniano testified as a prosecution witness in the ballot-fraud trial of former City Councilman Michael LoPorto, whom he identified as a friend.

The fact that anybody could consider stealing somebody's right to vote as 'tradition' notwithstanding, the statement coincides with previous statements made by Anthony Renna and Anthony DeFiglio, two Democrats who were found guilty of forgery and falsifying business records.  In January, the pair told Fox News that "voter fraud is an accepted way of winning elections, and faking absentee ballots was commonplace."

Republicans at the time denied such accusations.  James Gordon, Chairman of the Troy Republican Committee said, having been a part of the election process for a number of years that he has, "never heard or seen anything resembling these actions."

He added, "In fact, after the Democrats were caught in 2009 the records at the Board of Elections were searched.  More cases of fraud were found dating back to 2007 or 2008, all attributed to Democrat candidates and operatives.  Nothing from any GOP members."…

I’m sure voter fraud occurs in cases with Republicans as well, but I’m also sure it is more common place with the Democrats.  They tend to be better at rationalizing things.

6.  Obama identifies his biggest failure

Call it "too much substance, not enough style?" President Barack Obama says his biggest mistake since getting to the White House three and a half years ago has been his tendency to tackle the job as national policy wonk rather than the inspiring figure he cut in the 2008 campaign.

"When I think about what we've done well and what we haven't done well," the president told CBS television in an interview, "the mistake of my first term - couple of years - was thinking that this job was just about getting the policy right."

"And that's important. But the nature of this office is also to tell a story to the American people that gives them a sense of unity and purpose and optimism, especially during tough times," Obama said in an excerpt of the exchange with Charlie Rose.

Apparently Mr. Obama has decided to tell us a story right now with this pathetic answer.  Let’s see, what other failure could he own up to?  Working too hard for all the American people?  Not going after a much bigger stimulus?  Not taking enough vacation time so he would be fresher to take on those dastardly Republicans?   Got any ideas of your own?  Put them in comments.

7.  SCOTUS Obamacare decision hurts the Democrats

The latest Quinnipiac poll shows that — by a 15-point margin — the Supreme Court’s Obamacare ruling makes voters less likely, rather than more likely, to cast their vote for President Obama. Twenty-seven percent of registered voters say that the ruling makes them “less likely” to vote for Obama, while only 12 percent say that it makes them “more likely” to do so. Only 9 percent of independents say that they are “more likely” to vote for Obama because of the ruling, compared to 27 percent who are “less likely.” …

… This poll — and the past 100 repeal polls from Rasmussen Reports — shows that the House of Representatives was doing the people’s bidding when it voted yesterday to repeal Obamacare — by a 59-vote margin (244 to 185).  Conversely, the House was not doing the people’s bidding when (then under Democratic control) it voted to pass Obamacare in 2010 — by a mere 7-vote margin (219 to 212).

It isn’t popular and you know that because no one on the Obama team is talking about it.  Sometimes the dog just doesn’t like the dog food.

No comments:

Post a Comment