Category Archives: Election

“What has Obama Done? Here Are 200 Accomplishments! With Citations!”

What has Obama Done? Here Are 200 Accomplishments! With Citations! Posted by Milt Shook

Obama2What makes the "disappointment" argument irritating is that it’s simply not true. He’s done nearly everything we elect a president to do, and he did it all with little support from the left, and massive obstruction from the right. .

Is he perfect? No, he’s human. Does he deserve some criticism? Of course, but at this point, it really doesn’t matter.

What does matter is that this president has compiled a STELLAR record given the circumstances under which he took office. If you can look at this list of the president’s accomplishments and not be excited, you have a serious problem with perspective.

Pass this list [of 200 items at the link] around to everyone you know. And don’t be afraid; unlike many such lists, every item includes a link to a citation supporting it.

http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html

The Great Recession of 2007–2009

Are We Better off Now than in 2008? You Betcha!

SOURCE: AP/Pablo Martinez Monsivais

By Christian E. Weller | September 4, 2012

In short, our economy and financial markets went into a tailspin in the second half of 2008 due to the consequences of conservative economic policies implemented aggressively by the Bush administration.

Fast forward to the summer of 2012. The U.S. economy has added jobs since February 2010, the economy has been growing since June 2009, corporate profits have risen sharply, foreclosures are finally falling, and household wealth is continuing to expand. Instead of a second Great Depression, the actions of the Obama administration resulted in our economy exiting what became known as the Great Recession of 2007–2009 within six months.

Are we better off today than in 2008? You betcha.

[charts galore at:]

http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/economy/news/2012/09/04/36357/are-we-better-off-now-than-in-2008-you-betcha/

Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital | Rolling Stone — a must-read article

Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital | Politics News | Rolling Stone

How the GOP presidential candidate and his private equity firm staged an epic wealth grab, destroyed jobs – and stuck others with the bill

by: Matt Taibbi

A man makes a $250 million fortune loading up companies with debt and then extracting million-dollar fees from those same companies, in exchange for the generous service of telling them who needs to be fired in order to finance the debt payments he saddled them with in the first place. That same man then runs for president riding an image of children roasting on flames of debt, choosing as his running mate perhaps the only politician in America more pompous and self-righteous on the subject of the evils of borrowed money than the candidate himself. If Romney pulls off this whopper, you’ll have to tip your hat to him: No one in history has ever successfully run for president riding this big of a lie. It’s almost enough to make you think he really is qualified for the White House.

The unlikeliness of Romney’s gambit isn’t simply a reflection of his own artlessly unapologetic mindset – it stands as an emblem for the resiliency of the entire sociopathic Wall Street set he represents. Four years ago, the Mitt Romneys of the world nearly destroyed the global economy with their greed, shortsightedness and – most notably – wildly irresponsible use of debt in pursuit of personal profit. The sight was so disgusting that people everywhere were ready to drop an H-bomb on Lower Manhattan and bayonet the survivors. But today that same insane greed ethos, that same belief in the lunatic pursuit of instant borrowed millions – it’s dusted itself off, it’s had a shave and a shoeshine, and it’s back out there running for president. …

Take a typical Bain transaction involving an Indiana-based company called American Pad and Paper. Bain bought Ampad in 1992 for just $5 million, financing the rest of the deal with borrowed cash. Within three years, Ampad was paying $60 million in annual debt payments, plus an additional $7 million in management fees. A year later, Bain led Ampad to go public, cashed out about $50 million in stock for itself and its investors, charged the firm $2 million for arranging the IPO and pocketed another $5 million in "management" fees. Ampad wound up going bankrupt, and hundreds of workers lost their jobs, but Bain and Romney weren’t crying: They’d made more than $100 million on a $5 million investment.

To recap: Romney, who has compared the devilish federal debt to a "nightmare" home mortgage that is "adjustable, no-money down and assigned to our children," took over Ampad with essentially no money down, saddled the firm with a nightmare debt and assigned the crushing interest payments not to Bain but to the children of Ampad’s workers, who would be left holding the note long after Romney fled the scene. The mortgage analogy is so obvious, in fact, that even Romney himself has made it. He once described Bain’s debt-fueled strategy as "using the equivalent of a mortgage to leverage up our investment."

Romney has always kept his distance from the real-life consequences of his profiteering. At one point during Bain’s looting of Ampad, a worker named Randy Johnson sent a handwritten letter to Romney, asking him to intervene to save an Ampad factory in Marion, Indiana. In a sterling demonstration of manliness and willingness to face a difficult conversation, Romney, who had just lost his race for the Senate in Massachusetts, wrote Johnson that he was "sorry," but his lawyers had advised him not to get involved. (So much for the candidate who insists that his way is always to "fight to save every job.")

This is typical Romney, who consistently adopts a public posture of having been above the fray, with no blood on his hands from any of the deals he personally engineered. "I never actually ran one of our investments," he says in Turnaround. "That was left to management."

In reality, though, Romney was unquestionably the decider at Bain. "I insisted on having almost dictatorial powers," he bragged years after the Ampad deal. …

Within the cult of Wall Street that forged Mitt Romney, making money justifies any behavior, no matter how venal. The look on Romney’s face when he refuses to apologize says it all: Hey, I’m trying to win an election. We’re all grown-ups here. After the Ampad deal, Romney expressed contempt for critics who lived in "fantasy land." "This is the real world," he said, "and in the real world there is nothing wrong with companies trying to compete, trying to stay alive, trying to make money." …

Then in 2000, right before Romney gave up his ownership stake in Bain Capital, the firm targeted KB Toys. The debacle that followed serves as a prime example of the conflict between the old model of American business, built from the ground up with sweat and industry know-how, and the new globalist model, the Romney model, which uses leverage as a weapon of high-speed conquest.

In a typical private-equity fragging, Bain put up a mere $18 million to acquire KB Toys and got big banks to finance the remaining $302 million it needed. Less than a year and a half after the purchase, Bain decided to give itself a gift known as a "dividend recapitalization." The firm induced KB Toys to redeem $121 million in stock and take out more than $66 million in bank loans – $83 million of which went directly into the pockets of Bain’s owners and investors, including Romney. "The dividend recap is like borrowing someone else’s credit card to take out a cash advance, and then leaving them to pay it off," says Heather Slavkin Corzo, who monitors private equity takeovers as the senior legal policy adviser for the AFL-CIO.

Bain ended up earning a return of at least 370 percent on the deal, while KB Toys fell into bankruptcy, saddled with millions in debt. KB’s former parent company, Big Lots, alleged in bankruptcy court that Bain’s "unjustified" return on the dividend recap was actually "900 percent in a mere 16 months." Patnode, by contrast, was fired in December 2008, after almost four decades on the job.

Greed and Debt: The True Story of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital | Politics News | Rolling Stone

“Of course the country is better off than when Obama took over an economy that was close to collapse.” — EJ Dionne

The mood in Charlotte

By E.J. Dionne Jr.

And nothing better captured the Obama campaign’s dilemma than the difficulty its spokespeople had on the Sunday talk shows in answering the classic Reagan question: Are you better off now than you were four years ago?” It was remarkable lapse that a bunch of very smart operatives had not settled long ago on the clear and obvious answer: Of course the country is better off than when Obama took over an economy that was close to collapse. It’s still not as good as it needs to be, and Obama, unlike Romney, has the policies to get us the rest of the way.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/the-mood-in-charlotte/2012/09/04/d7832272-f6a4-11e1-8b93-c4f4ab1c8d13_blog.html?wprss=rss_ej-dionne

“Don’t Buy the Lie: We Built It Together”

Exactly.

Don’t Buy the Lie: We Built It Together

WE JUST GOT back from a 10-day vacation in New Mexico and Colorado. It would not have been possible had my fellow citizens not paid taxes and provided good and safe roads, rest areas, clean water and sewage facilities, subsidized electricity, police protection, tax-subsidized gasoline prices, libraries, museums, traffic signs/maps, Internet service thanks to DARPA (U.S. Army), public transportation, clean air, U.S. Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, local, county and state governments, public power and much more.

The beautiful agricultural crops we saw are subsidized by taxpayers. My farm family relatives have benefited and still do. The fire-scarred forests were still worth seeing thanks to taxpayer-subsidized firefighters who stopped the burning. The skies were more beautiful thanks to taxpayer-subsidized clean air regulations. Thanks to President Eisenhower and Congress for the safe and beautiful interstate highways and the taxpayers who paid for them.

Indeed, even the lodging, restaurants and other retailers would not have been available had not taxpayers provided the infrastructure for them to thrive. We would not have come back loaded with antiques from merchants along the way had not my fellow citizens chipped in for the last 200-plus years to support an economy that provided me with old and new products along the way.

I could not have understood much of what I experienced if not for teachers and communications from media over my lifetime where I learned about my country. Taxpayer support for radio and TV came through the many public agencies that support the airwaves.

In other words, I did not alone provide for my vacation. Millions of my fellow citizens paid their share, and my wife and I are grateful. I am grateful to live in a tax-supported free country where others have lived and died to help me. Thank you!

Why should I condemn “government” and pretend I have pulled myself up by my own bootstraps when you paid for so much so that I could enjoy my retirement and travel.

ELMER JACKSON
Albuquerque

http://www.abqjournal.com/main/2012/09/04/opinion/talk-of-the-town-60.html

The question isn’t “are you better off?” It’s “would you be better off with more of the same Republican policies?” — a resounding NO!

There is no good reason to give the Republicans another chance — they had 30 years. mjh

INGRAHAM: You’ve also noted that there are signs of improvement on the horizon in the economy. How do you answer the president’s argument that the economy is getting better in a general election campaign if you yourself are saying it’s getting better?

ROMNEY: Well, of course it’s getting better. The economy always gets better after a recession, there is always a recovery. […]

INGRAHAM: Isn’t it a hard argument to make if you’re saying, like, OK, he inherited this recession, he took a bunch of steps to try to turn the economy around, and now, we’re seeing more jobs, but vote against him anyway? Isn’t that a hard argument to make? Is that a stark enough contrast?

ROMNEY: Have you got a better one, Laura? It just happens to be the truth.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/04/790251/romney-of-course-its-getting-better/?mobile=nc

David Brooks is the kind of conservative liberals like

Shields and Brooks Wrap on 2012 Republican National Convention | PBS NewsHour | Aug. 31, 2012 | PBS

DAVID BROOKS: There is a supposition in there which is questionable, frankly, which is that if GDP goes up, if productivity goes up, everybody will benefit.

And that is a supposition, we’re going to get growth going, we’re going to get business going and everybody will benefit. Frankly, you look at the history of the last 20 or 30 years, that’s not necessarily so.

MARK SHIELDS: That’s right.

DAVID BROOKS: Productivity has risen. Wages have not necessarily risen because the reward to skills is so much greater than it used to be. And the penalty for lack of skills is so much greater than it used to be.

And Republicans, frankly, didn’t address that problem, and I do think that remains a problem for them.

JUDY WOODRUFF: But isn’t that much of the premise that they base that argument on, that growth…

DAVID BROOKS: Well, their basic supposition is that capitalism is basically functioning the way it has and frankly the way it has for hundreds of years, that as the economy grows, everybody gets a piece of it.

But there — we have to have some doubts about that because of the structure of the information age economy. …

DAVID BROOKS: I do think they have a problem of talking too much to, as if everyone in America was a small business person. And if — everyone sort of admires entrepreneurs and small business people. Fine, but we’re not all small business people.

And I think there are a lot of people in America who, you know, they are not going to be small business people, and they probably didn’t hear all that much. Maybe they will get some benefit as small businesses grow, but nothing that immediate, the immediate problems of paying for a kid’s college or wage stagnation. You didn’t hear that immediate help for you.

Shields and Brooks Wrap on 2012 Republican National Convention | PBS NewsHour | Aug. 31, 2012 | PBS