Fooled Yet?
Fooled Yet?

The news on the prospective Republican presidential nominee this week has been fast and furious and has nothing to do with a Darrell Issa bogus investigation even though it does seem contemptible.  Dribs and Drabs it isn’t, a new story, angle, article or accusation seems to be popping up almost hourly about Mitt and his financial entanglements.

Thus and therefore, Ipso Facto, and whereas we need a spot to put “da stuff” and here it is!  A mini TO/OT, if you will, dedicated to Willard’s walk on the financial wild side.  PlanetPOV’s very own collection of opposition research collected from your comments.

To follow our policy though, you may disagree with the Democrats and think they have gone to far, that it’s unfounded or that “Bainers” are no better than “Birthers” and it is clouding the policy debates that this country is badly needs.

This is the place to express it.

My take that I think many, no most, are either missing, avoiding or ignoring is not just the Bain story and when Mitt was or wasn’t running Bain, but his foreign accounts, investments  and investment companies.  So little is even know about them and so little can even be discovered about them, that’s why they exist, they are there to be hidden, to be secretive.  Offshore accounts now may hold as much as 17 TRILLION dollars of unregulated, unreported and secretive accounts and how much of that is Mitt Romney’s?  No one knows nor does any regulator know what it is investing in.  Who are the invstors?

Are his accounts invested in gun or dope running?  Laundering those enterprises money?  Are they invested in dictatorships, are the dictators investing in them.  Paramilitary groups, are they getting a good or poor return investing in the accounts?  How much is Mitt Inc. making? We don’t know.

OK, I did pick some very nasty and nefarious people and activities, but if Mitt chooses to not disclose, can’t I make the worst of assumptions?  Paul Krugman stuck that note the other day, we can only assume.

It can neither be slanderous nor scandalous, I am not making any accusations, I can’t, because I don’t know — Only Mitt knows and he’s not talking.

The very secretiveness of these accounts would seem to make him unelectable to me.  And don’t fall for what he said in his Friday night dump that these accounts are controlled by his “blind trust,” they were set up well before he had any such thing, another lie.

Now ask yourself this: Without knowing what the accounts are invested in, who the investors are, how much they are worth or how much the other investors have invested.  How would they effect his presidential decisions?  Would he make a decision not based on information from his Secretary of  State, Secretary of Commerce or the Secretary of Defense but from knowing that it would harm one of his investors even if that person was violating human rights?

Along with his unseen tax returns, this is just way too secretive for me.  The American people deserve better from “the leader of the free world.”  We deserve to be an informed voter.

After all, “he is running for President of the United States, for Pete’s sake.”

Leave a Comment

Please Login to comment
37 Comment threads
46 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
10 Comment authors
SallyTAlphaBitchfunksandsAdLibNirek Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of

I heard on Lawrence ODonnell tonight talking about Romney and his flip flop on abortion and his meeting with the church when he was running for Governor of Mass. So, I found this article on it and that meeting.

The Conversion
How, when, and why Mitt Romney changed his mind on abortion.

Wirthlin’s poll said that if he ran as a pro-lifer, he’d lose. It would be simplistic to say that the poll dictated Romney’s decision. But we know that he used the poll to influence the most important pro-life organization he had to appease at the time: the elders of the LDS church.

In 1993, Romney went to Salt Lake City to explain to the Mormon church leaders why he was going to take a pro-choice position on abortion.
Michael Madsen/Thinkstock.
Scott’s account, as told in his book and in a more detailed interview with Slate, is based on conversations with Romney and other senior church officials who were present. As president of the Boston stake, Romney owed church leaders a consultation before doing anything that might cause them trouble. In October or November 1993, he went to Salt Lake City to meet with them and explain the abortion position he was going to take. Wirthlin went with him. In these meetings, Wirthlin was more than a pollster. He was a church official, a brother of one of the church’s 12 apostles, and a cousin of the church’s next president.
Romney didn’t ask the brethren in Salt Lake what his abortion position should be. He had already decided on it. He didn’t ask them to endorse it, either. He came to explain his position, why he had to take it, and how it conformed to church doctrine. He told them he would say that he opposed abortion personally but that such private beliefs shouldn’t be imposed on others. Romney argued that this view was acceptable under the doctrine of free agency, and he used the poll data to close the sale. If he didn’t frame his position as pro-choice, he’d lose. Many of the church leaders were unhappy with Romney’s formulation. But if they wanted him in the Senate, this was the best they were going to get.
Scott was present when Romney talked about the meetings after he returned to Boston.
Judy Dushku, a Mormon feminist, says she heard a similar account from Romney in 1994:
I went to his office and I congratulated him on taking a pro-choice position. And his response was—Well they told me in Salt Lake City I could take this position, and in fact I probably had to in order to win in a liberal state like Massachusetts. … I said, Mitt, it doesn’t make me happy to hear that. What you’re suggesting is that you’re not genuinely pro-choice. It’s a position of convenience. He said—Oh no, I actually had an aunt who died of a botched abortion. So I have some positive feelings about choice, but basically I know that I have to take that position.

He even lied about the girl! She wasn’t an aunt but his sister husband’s sister! You cannot believe anything he says!


So, Romney, when are you just going to say that the President copied from your many speeches?

Romney To Olympians: ‘You Didn’t Get Here Solely On Your Own’

Mitt Romney himself made an almost identical point during his speech at the Opening Ceremonies of the 2002 Winter Olympics, crediting the community for helping individuals achieve the pinnacle of success:
ROMNEY: You Olympians, however, know you didn’t get here solely on your own power. For most of you, loving parents, sisters or brothers, encouraged your hopes, coaches guided, communities built venues in order to organize competitions. All Olympians stand on the shoulders of those who lifted them. We’ve already cheered the Olympians, let’s also cheer the parents, coaches, and communities.

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Interesting long article.

Romney Invested Millions in Firms That Pioneered High-Tech Outsourcing

EXCLUSIVE: A government document shows that at Bain he held a $54 million stake in companies that manufactured electronics in China and Mexico for US firms.

In recent weeks, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have accused each other of being an “outsourcer in chief,” as their campaigns have tussled over Romney’s past at Bain Capital and the (non)release of his tax returns. But all this scuffling hasn’t taken into account an until-now unreported fact about Romney’s days at Bain: When he was running the private equity firm, he invested tens of millions of dollars in a pair of companies that specialized in outsourcing high-tech manufacturing and that developed offshore production facilities in Mexico, China, and elsewhere to build electronics for US firms.




“In a profile in Chief Executive magazine, Marks dismissed concern about shipping US jobs overseas. “Outsourcing is good for America,” he insisted. The magazine crowned him the king of electronics outsourcing: “Marks, more than anyone else, is responsible for the outsourcing trend in the tech industry.” And Romney had provided him capital for his efforts.”