The Mitt Romney Deception

Author Topic: The Mitt Romney Deception  (Read 40233 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,634
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Time to Start a Romney Information Thread..
« Reply #40 on: December 30, 2011, 02:08:15 am »
Here is a little insight into Mitt Romney...Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JLMJHsSaKU&feature=endscreen&NR=1

JTCoyoté


"The cause of America is in a great measure
the cause of all mankind. Where, some say, is
the king of America? I'll tell you, friend, He
reigns above."
~Thomas Paine

Offline shipgeek

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,016
Re: Time to Start a Romney Information Thread..
« Reply #41 on: December 30, 2011, 02:19:24 am »
No need for a crystal ball on this one

sheep vote result:

If Mittens gets the Republican nomination
Obama will earn himself 4 more years in the White House


 :o
E MARE LIBERTAS

Online John_Back_From_The_Club_O

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5,691
    • From Hell to Veins
Re: Time to Start a Romney Information Thread..
« Reply #42 on: December 30, 2011, 02:20:31 am »
Mystery Mitt Romney donor comes forward

The anonymous donor behind the headline-making $1 million contribution to a pro-Mitt Romney super PAC is a former Bain Capital official with long ties to the candidate, who's asking the outside group to amend its filings, POLITICO has learned...

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60776.html#ixzz1i04mcINw

Offline JT Coyoté

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,634
  • "REMEMBER THE ALAMO!"
Re: Time to Start a Romney Information Thread..
« Reply #43 on: December 30, 2011, 02:35:49 am »
And How about Mitt on Guns... as he flips...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9Ygw9CQ9po&feature=endscreen&NR=1

This one is a little rough but it seems Mitt doesn't know or just forgot the primary reason for the 2nd Amendment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-UQG7k1uX0&feature=related

JTCoyoté

"In framing a government which is to be administered
by men over men you must first enable the
government to control the governed; and in
the next place oblige it to control itself."

~James Madison

Offline fluffhead

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
Romney's top donor: Goldman Sachs Ron Paul's top donor: US Army
« Reply #44 on: January 02, 2012, 12:52:27 pm »
http://milwaukeestory.com/index.php/2012/01/02/romneys-top-contributer-goldman-sachs-ron-pauls-us-army-346/

Romney is the candidate that will likely be buddy-buddy with Wall Street. Mitt Romney's top ten is made up of Goldman Sachs, followed by Credit Suisse (Switzerland), Morgan Stanley, Barclays (UK), Bank of America and JP Morgan. In contrast Romney's co-frontrunner in Iowa, Ron Paul, has a top three donor list made up of the US Army, US Navy and US Air Force.

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
17 Reasons Why A Vote For Mitt Romney Is A Vote For The New World Order
« Reply #45 on: January 03, 2012, 11:37:54 am »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/17-reasons-why-a-vote-for-mitt-romney-is-a-vote-for-the-new-world-order.html

17 Reasons Why A Vote For Mitt Romney Is A Vote For The New World Order

The American Dream
Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Once again, the Republican Party is being tempted to vote for “the lesser of two evils”.  A lot of Republicans are actually considering voting for Mitt Romney because they have bought the lie that he has “the best chance” of defeating Barack Obama in 2012.  But just because he is the Republican candidate that is most like Barack Obama does not mean that he has the best chance of defeating him.  The truth is that no self-respecting Republican should ever vote for Mitt Romney.  A vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for the New World Order.  Romney comes from the financial establishment, he is being showered with money from the financial establishment and he supports all of the goals of the financial establishment.  This year, millions upon millions of dollars are being funneled into Romney’s campaign and into pro-Romney organizations.  The New World Order is literally trying to buy the 2012 election for their dream candidate.  Romney would be the ultimate Wall Street puppet, and if you cast a vote for Mitt Romney you are playing right into the hands of the financial elite.

If you do not believe that a vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for the New World Order, just consider Mitt Romney’s positions on the issues….

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline stymo1

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,881
It's Official.... Romney is an asshat!
« Reply #46 on: January 04, 2012, 05:15:34 pm »
" It's called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it." -- George Carlin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

Jordan

  • Guest
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #47 on: January 06, 2012, 10:57:07 pm »
Romney tangled with Mormon feminist: "I can tell you one thing: you’re not my kind of Mormon," he told a Massachusetts church member."


I’ve written before about the rarely discussed period of Mitt Romney’s life when he was a leader in the LDS church in Massachusetts and enforced some of its most socially conservative policies.

Vanity Fair just published an adaptation from a new biography of Romney that offers what (I believe) is a previously unreported anecdote about Romney’s time as a Mormon leader. Authors Michael Kranish and Scott Helman report that Romney told off a woman with feminist leanings who was a member of the stake (equivalent to a diocese) of which Romney was then president:

    One woman who had been active in the [feminist] Exponent II organization was Judy Dushku, a longtime scholar of global politics at Suffolk University in Boston. At one point while Romney was stake president, Dushku wanted to visit the temple outside Washington to take out endowments, a sacred rite that commits Mormons to a lifetime of faithfulness to the church. …

    After what she described as a “lovely interview” with her bishop and after speaking with one of Romney’s counselors, she went to see Romney. She wasn’t sure what to expect. Despite Romney’s willingness to allow some changes in 1993, he and Dushku had clashed over the church’s treatment of women. “He says something like ‘I suspect, if you’ve gotten through both of the interviews, there’s nothing I can do to keep you from going to the temple,’ ” Dushku recalled. “I said, ‘Well, why would you want to keep me from going to the temple?’ ” Romney’s answer, Dushku said, was biting. “He said, ‘Well, Judy, I just don’t understand why you stay in the church.’ ” She asked him whether he wanted her to really answer that question. “And he said, ‘No, actually. I don’t understand it, but I also don’t care. I don’t care why you do. But I can tell you one thing: you’re not my kind of Mormon.’ ”

http://www.salon.com/2012/01/06/romney_tangled_with_mormon_feminist/

The Dark Side of Mitt Romney


Mitt Romney has long been a front-runner for the G.O.P. nomination—even if no one really knows who he is. Digging into the candidate’s record as a Mormon leader, his business deals at Bain Capital, and that infamous car trip with the family dog strapped to the roof, Michael Kranish and Scott Helman pierce the Mitt bubble in an adaptation from their new book, The Real Romney, to find that the contradictions, question marks, and ambivalence go deeper than his politics.

Mitt Romney’s privileged pedigree was common knowledge to his classmates at Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School, where he was simultaneously enrolled in 1971 through a joint-degree program. By that time, his father, George Romney, had run a major corporation (American Motors), been elected three times as Michigan’s governor, sought the presidency, and been appointed to President Nixon’s Cabinet. Despite strongly resembling the elder Romney—the full head of strikingly dark hair, square jaw, dazzling smile—Mitt did little to draw attention to his parentage. The only hint was George’s faded gold initials on a beat-up old briefcase that Mitt carried around.

In truth, Mitt cherished his father’s example and endeavored to follow it. George became more than just a mentor to his youngest son. He was a pathfinder, showing the way of their Mormon faith through the thickets of politics and business, home life, and character. Through his achievements and mistakes, George had bestowed many lessons, and Mitt soaked them up. “His whole life,” said John Wright, a close family friend, “was following a pattern which had been laid out by his dad.” So with his wife, Ann, as a partner and his father as an inspiration, Mitt set out to build a family, a career, and a place in the church that he loved.

The Romneys’ Mormon faith, as Mitt and Ann began their life together, formed a deep foundation. It lay under nearly everything—their acts of charity, their marriage, their parenting, their social lives, even their weekly schedules. Their family-centric lifestyle was a choice; Mitt and Ann plainly cherished time at home with their children more than anything. But it was also a duty. Belonging to the Mormon Church meant accepting a code of conduct that placed supreme value on strong families—strong heterosexual families, in which men and women often filled defined and traditional roles. The Romneys have long cited a well-known Mormon credo popularized by the late church leader David O. McKay: “No other success can compensate for failure in the home.” They had arrived in the Boston area with one son, Taggart, and soon had a second, Matthew. Over the next decade, the Romneys would have three more boys: Joshua was born in 1975, Benjamin in 1978, and then Craig in 1981.

To Mitt, the special one in the house was Ann, with her wide smile, piercing eyes, and steadying domestic presence. And woe was the boy who forgot it. Tagg said there was one rule that was simply not breakable: “We were not allowed to say anything negative about my mother, talk back to her, do anything that would not be respectful of her.” On Mother’s Day, their home would be fragrant with lilacs, Ann’s favorite flowers. Tagg didn’t get it back then, but he came to understand. From the beginning, Mitt had put Ann on a pedestal and kept her there. “When they were dating,” Tagg said, “he felt like she was way better than him and he was really lucky to have this catch. He really genuinely still feels that way.” What makes his parents’ relationship work, he said, is their distinct characters: Mitt is driven first by reason, while Ann operates more on emotion. “She helps him see there’s stuff beyond the logic; he helps her see that there’s more than just instinct and feeling,” Tagg said. Mitt and Ann’s relationship would grow and change as their family entered the public eye. But she has remained his chief counselor and confidante, the one person who can lead Mitt to a final decision. Though she did not necessarily offer detailed input on every business deal, friends said, she weighed in on just about everything else. “Mitt’s not going to do something that they don’t feel good about together,” said Mitt’s sister Jane. Tagg said they called their mom “the great Mitt stabilizer.” Ann would later be mocked for her claim that she and Mitt had never had an argument during their marriage, which sounded preposterous to the ears of many married mortals. Tagg said it’s not that his parents never disagree. “I know there are things that she says that he doesn’t agree with sometimes, and I see him kind of bite his tongue. But I know that they go and discuss it in private. He doesn’t ever contradict my mother in public.” Friends of the Romneys’ back up that account, saying they cannot recall Mitt ever raising his voice toward Ann. Nowhere was Ann’s special status more evident than on long family car trips. Mitt imposed strict rules: they would stop only for gas, and that was the only chance to get food or use the restroom. With one exception, Tagg explained. “As soon as my mom says, ‘I think I need to go to the bathroom,’ he pulls over instantly and doesn’t complain. ‘Anything for you, Ann.’” On one infamous road trip, though, it wasn’t Ann who forced Mitt off the highway. The destination of this journey, in the summer of 1983, was his parents’ cottage, on the Canadian shores of Lake Huron. The white Chevy station wagon with the wood paneling was overstuffed with suitcases, supplies, and sons when Mitt climbed behind the wheel to begin the 12-hour family trek from Boston to Ontario. As with most ventures in his life, he had left little to chance, mapping out the route and planning each stop. Before beginning the drive, Mitt put Seamus, the family’s hulking Irish setter, in a dog carrier and attached it to the station wagon’s roof rack. He had improvised a windshield for the carrier to make the ride more comfortable for the dog.

Then Mitt put his sons on notice: there would be pre-determined stops for gas, and that was it. Tagg was commandeering the way-back of the wagon, keeping his eyes fixed out the rear window, when he glimpsed the first sign of trouble. “Dad!” he yelled. “Gross!” A brown liquid was dripping down the rear window, payback from an Irish setter who’d been riding on the roof in the wind for hours. As the rest of the boys joined in the howls of disgust, Mitt coolly pulled off the highway and into a service station. There he borrowed a hose, washed down Seamus and the car, then hopped back onto the road with the dog still on the roof. It was a preview of a trait he would grow famous for in business: emotion-free crisis management. But the story would trail him years later on the national political stage, where the name Seamus would become shorthand for Romney’s coldly clinical approach to problem solving.
The Book of Mitt

If Romney is exceedingly comfortable around family and close friends, he’s much less so around those he doesn’t know well, drawing a boundary that’s difficult to traverse. It’s a strict social order—us and them—that has put co-workers, political aides, casual acquaintances, and others in his professional circles, even people who have worked with or known him for years, outside the bubble. As a result, he has numerous admirers but, by several accounts, not a long list of close pals. “He’s very engaging and charming in a small group of friends he’s comfortable with,” said one former aide. “When he’s with people he doesn’t know, he gets more formal. And if it’s a political thing where he doesn’t know anybody, he has a mask.” For those outside the inner circle, Romney comes across as all business. Colleagues at work or political staffers are there to do a job, not to bond. “Mitt is always the star,” said one Massachusetts Republican. “And everybody else is a bit player.” He has little patience for idle chatter or small talk, little interest in mingling at cocktail parties, at social functions, or even in the crowded hallway. He is not fed by, and does not crave, casual social interaction, often displaying little desire to know who people are and what makes them tick. “He wasn’t overly interested in people’s personal details or their kids or spouses or team building or their career path,” said another former aide. “It was all very friendly but not very deep.” Or, as one fellow Republican put it, “He has that invisible wall between ‘me’ and ‘you.’” Referring to the time later when Romney was governor of Massachusetts, a Democratic lawmaker recalls, “You remember Richard Nixon and the imperial presidency? Well, this was the imperial governor.” There were the ropes that often curtailed access to Romney and his chambers. The elevator settings restricted access to his office. The tape on the floor told people exactly where to stand during events. This was the controlled environment that Romney created. His orbit was his own. “We always would talk about how, among the legislators, he had no idea what our names were—none,” the lawmaker said, “because he was so far removed from the day-to-day operations of state government.”

This sense of detachment is a function partly of his faith, which has its own tight social community that most outsiders don’t see. Indeed, the stories of Romney’s humanity and warmth come mostly from people who know him as a fellow Mormon. His abstention from drinking also makes parties and other alcohol-fueled functions distinctly less appealing. He is the antithesis of the gregarious pol with a highball in one hand and a cigar in his mouth. Romney’s discomfort around strangers would later become more than just a curiosity; it would be an impediment on the campaign trail. Lacking an easy rapport with voters, he would come across as aloof, even off-putting. “A lot of it is he is patrician. He just is. He has lived a charmed life,” said one former aide. “It is a big challenge that he has, connecting to folks who haven’t swum in the same rarefied waters that he has.” His growing wealth, the deeper he got into his career, only widened the disconnect. Even as he began shouldering more responsibility at work, Romney would assume several leadership positions in the Mormon Church. But he could handle it. “Mitt,” said Kem Gardner, a fellow church official from this period, “just had the capacity to keep all the balls up in the air.” Or, as Tagg put it, “Compared to my dad, everyone’s lazy.” Helen Claire Sievers, who served in a church leadership position under Romney, got a glimpse of his work habits during weekend bus trips to the Mormon temple near Washington, D.C. Church groups would leave late on a Friday, drive all night, and arrive early on Saturday morning. Then they’d spend all day Saturday in temple sessions before turning around and driving home, to be back by Sunday morning. It was a grueling itinerary, Sievers said, so everyone used the time on the bus to sleep or read quietly. Everyone but Romney. “Mitt was always working. His light was on,” she said.

Mormon congregations, typically groups of 400 to 500 people, are known as wards, and their boundaries are determined by geography. Wards, along with smaller congregations known as branches, are organized into stakes. Thus a stake, akin to a Catholic diocese, is a collection of wards and branches in a city or region. Unlike Protestants or Catholics, Mormons do not choose the congregations to which they belong. It depends entirely on where they live. In another departure from many other faiths, Mormons do not have paid full-time clergy. Members in good standing take turns serving in leadership roles. They are expected to perform their ecclesiastical duties on top of career and family responsibilities. Those called to serve as stake presidents and bishops, or leaders of local wards, are fully empowered as agents of the church, and they carry great authority over their domains. Mitt Romney first took on a major church role around 1977, when he was called to be a counselor to Gordon Williams, then the president of the Boston stake. Romney was essentially an adviser and deputy to Williams, helping oversee area congregations. His appointment was somewhat unusual in that counselors at that level have typically been bishops of their local wards first. But Romney, who was only about 30 years old, was deemed to possess leadership qualities beyond his years. Romney’s responsibilities only grew from there; he would go on to serve as bishop and then as stake president, overseeing about a dozen congregations with close to 4,000 members altogether. Those positions in the church amounted to his biggest leadership test yet, exposing him to personal and institutional crises, human tragedies, immigrant cultures, social forces, and organizational challenges that he had never before encountered.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is far more than a form of Sunday worship. It is a code of ethics that frowns on homosexuality, out-of-wedlock births, and abortion and forbids pre-marital sex. It offers a robust, effective social safety net, capable of incredible feats of charity, support, and service, particularly when its own members are in trouble. And it works hard to create community, a built-in network of friends who often share values and a worldview. For many Mormons, the all-encompassing nature of their faith, as an extension of their spiritual lives, is what makes belonging to the church so wonderful, so warm, even as its insularity can set members apart from society.

But a dichotomy exists within the Mormon Church, which holds that one is either in or out; there is little or no tolerance for those, like so-called cafeteria Catholics, who pick and choose what doctrines to follow. And in Mormonism, if one is in, a lot is expected, including tithing 10 percent of one’s income, participating regularly in church activities, meeting high moral expectations, and accepting Mormon doctrine—including many concepts, such as the belief that Jesus will rule from Missouri in his Second Coming, that run counter to those of other Christian faiths. That rigidity can be difficult to abide for those who love the faith but chafe at its strictures or question its teachings and cultural habits. For one, Mormonism is male-dominated—women can serve only in certain leadership roles and never as bishops or stake presidents. The church also makes a number of firm value judgments, typically prohibiting single or divorced men from leading wards and stakes, for example, and not looking kindly upon single parenthood.

The portrait of Romney that emerges from those he led and served with in the church is of a leader who was pulled between Mormonism’s conservative core views and practices and the demands from some quarters within the Boston stake for a more elastic, more open-minded application of church doctrine. Romney was forced to strike a balance between those local expectations and the dictates out of Salt Lake City. Some believe that he artfully reconciled the two, praising him as an innovative and generous leader who was willing to make accommodations, such as giving women expanded responsibility, and who was always there for church members in times of need. To others, he was the product of a hidebound, patriarchal Mormon culture, inflexible and insensitive in delicate situations and dismissive of those who didn’t share his perspective.

In the spring of 1993, Helen Claire Sievers performed a bit of shuttle diplomacy to resolve a thorny problem confronting church leaders in Boston: resentment among progressive Mormon women at their subservient status within the church. Sievers was active in an organization of liberal women called Exponent II, which published a periodical. The group had been chewing over the challenges of being a woman in the male-led faith. So Sievers went to Romney, who was stake president, with a proposal. “I said, ‘Why don’t you have a meeting and have an open forum and let women talk to you?’” she recalled. The idea was that, although there were many church rules that stake presidents and bishops could not change, they did have some leeway to do things their own way.

Romney wasn’t sure about holding such a meeting, but he ultimately agreed to it. Sievers went back to the Exponent II group and said they should be realistic and not demand things Romney could never deliver, such as allowing women to hold the priesthood. On the day of the meeting, about 250 women filled the pews of the Belmont Chapel. After an opening song, prayer, and some housekeeping items, the floor was open. Women began proposing changes that would include them more in the life of the church. In the end, the group came up with some 70 suggestions—from letting women speak after men in church to putting changing tables in men’s bathrooms—as Romney and one of his counselors listened and took careful notes.

Romney was essentially willing to grant any request he couldn’t see a reason to reject. “Pretty much, he said yes to everything that I would have said yes to, and I’m kind of a liberal Mormon,” Sievers said. “I was pretty impressed.” (Ann Romney was not considered to be sympathetic to the agitation of liberal women within the stake. She was invited to social events sponsored by Exponent II but did not attend. She was, in the words of one member, understood to be “not that kind of woman.”)

Romney’s leadership was not so rosy for everyone, though. As both bishop and stake president, he at times clashed with women he felt strayed too far from church beliefs and practice. To them, he lacked the empathy and courage that they had known in other leaders, putting the church first even at times of great personal vulnerability. Peggie Hayes had joined the church as a teenager along with her mother and siblings. They’d had a difficult life. Mormonism offered the serenity and stability her mother craved. “It was,” Hayes said, “the answer to everything.” Her family, though poorer than many of the well-off members, felt accepted within the faith. Everyone was so nice. The church provided emotional and, at times, financial support. As a teenager, Hayes babysat for Mitt and Ann Romney and other couples in the ward. Then Hayes’s mother abruptly moved the family to Salt Lake City for Hayes’s senior year of high school. Restless and unhappy, Hayes moved to Los Angeles once she turned 18. She got married, had a daughter, and then got divorced shortly after. But she remained part of the church.

By 1983, Hayes was 23 and back in the Boston area, raising a 3-year-old daughter on her own and working as a nurse’s aide. Then she got pregnant again. Single motherhood was no picnic, but Hayes said she had wanted a second child and wasn’t upset at the news. “I kind of felt like I could do it,” she said. “And I wanted to.” By that point Mitt Romney, the man whose kids Hayes used to watch, was, as bishop of her ward, her church leader. But it didn’t feel so formal at first. She earned some money while she was pregnant organizing the Romneys’ basement. The Romneys also arranged for her to do odd jobs for other church members, who knew she needed the cash. “Mitt was really good to us. He did a lot for us,” Hayes said. Then Romney called Hayes one winter day and said he wanted to come over and talk. He arrived at her apartment in Somerville, a dense, largely working-class city just north of Boston. They chitchatted for a few minutes. Then Romney said something about the church’s adoption agency. Hayes initially thought she must have misunderstood. But Romney’s intent became apparent: he was urging her to give up her soon-to-be-born son for adoption, saying that was what the church wanted. Indeed, the church encourages adoption in cases where “a successful marriage is unlikely.”

Hayes was deeply insulted. She told him she would never surrender her child. Sure, her life wasn’t exactly the picture of Rockwellian harmony, but she felt she was on a path to stability. In that moment, she also felt intimidated. Here was Romney, who held great power as her church leader and was the head of a wealthy, prominent Belmont family, sitting in her gritty apartment making grave demands. “And then he says, ‘Well, this is what the church wants you to do, and if you don’t, then you could be excommunicated for failing to follow the leadership of the church,’ ” Hayes recalled. It was a serious threat. At that point Hayes still valued her place within the Mormon Church. “This is not playing around,” she said. “This is not like ‘You don’t get to take Communion.’ This is like ‘You will not be saved. You will never see the face of God.’ ” Romney would later deny that he had threatened Hayes with excommunication, but Hayes said his message was crystal clear: “Give up your son or give up your God.”

Not long after, Hayes gave birth to a son. She named him Dane. At nine months old, Dane needed serious, and risky, surgery. The bones in his head were fused together, restricting the growth of his brain, and would need to be separated. Hayes was scared. She sought emotional and spiritual support from the church once again. Looking past their uncomfortable conversation before Dane’s birth, she called Romney and asked him to come to the hospital to confer a blessing on her baby. Hayes was expecting him. Instead, two people she didn’t know showed up. She was crushed. “I needed him,” she said. “It was very significant that he didn’t come.” Sitting there in the hospital, Hayes decided she was finished with the Mormon Church. The decision was easy, yet she made it with a heavy heart. To this day, she remains grateful to Romney and others in the church for all they did for her family. But she shudders at what they were asking her to do in return, especially when she pulls out pictures of Dane, now a 27-year-old electrician in Salt Lake City. “There’s my baby,” she said.

In the fall of 1990, Exponent II published in its journal an unsigned essay by a married woman who, having already borne five children, had found herself some years earlier facing an unplanned sixth pregnancy. She couldn’t bear the thought of another child and was contemplating abortion. But the Mormon Church makes few exceptions to permit women to end a pregnancy. Church leaders have said that abortion can be justified in cases of rape or incest, when the health of the mother is seriously threatened, or when the fetus will surely not survive beyond birth. And even those circumstances “do not automatically justify an abortion,” according to church policy.

Then the woman’s doctors discovered she had a serious blood clot in her pelvis. She thought initially that would be her way out—of course she would have to get an abortion. But the doctors, she said, ultimately told her that, with some risk to her life, she might be able to deliver a full-term baby, whose chance of survival they put at 50 percent. One day in the hospital, her bishop—later identified as Romney, though she did not name him in the piece—paid her a visit. He told her about his nephew who had Down syndrome and what a blessing it had turned out to be for their family. “As your bishop,” she said he told her, “my concern is with the child.” The woman wrote, “Here I—a baptized, endowed, dedicated worker, and tithe-payer in the church—lay helpless, hurt, and frightened, trying to maintain my psychological equilibrium, and his concern was for the eight-week possibility in my uterus—not for me!”

Romney would later contend that he couldn’t recall the incident, saying, “I don’t have any memory of what she is referring to, although I certainly can’t say it could not have been me.” Romney acknowledged having counseled Mormon women not to have abortions except in exceptional cases, in accordance with church rules. The woman told Romney, she wrote, that her stake president, a doctor, had already told her, “Of course, you should have this abortion and then recover from the blood clot and take care of the healthy children you already have.” Romney, she said, fired back, “I don’t believe you. He wouldn’t say that. I’m going to call him.” And then he left. The woman said that she went on to have the abortion and never regretted it. “What I do feel bad about,” she wrote, “is that at a time when I would have appreciated nurturing and support from spiritual leaders and friends, I got judgment, criticism, prejudicial advice, and rejection.”

One woman who had been active in the Exponent II organization was Judy Dushku, a longtime scholar of global politics at Suffolk University in Boston. At one point while Romney was stake president, Dushku wanted to visit the temple outside Washington to take out endowments, a sacred rite that commits Mormons to a lifetime of faithfulness to the church. She had never entered a temple before and was thrilled at the chance to affirm her dedication to a faith she’d grown up with and grown to love. Earlier in her life, temples had been off limits to Mormons who, like Dushku, were married to non-Mormons. Now that rule had changed, and she was eager to go. But first she needed permission from her bishop and stake president.

After what she described as a “lovely interview” with her bishop and after speaking with one of Romney’s counselors, she went to see Romney. She wasn’t sure what to expect. Despite Romney’s willingness to allow some changes in 1993, he and Dushku had clashed over the church’s treatment of women. “He says something like ‘I suspect, if you’ve gotten through both of the interviews, there’s nothing I can do to keep you from going to the temple,’ ” Dushku recalled. “I said, ‘Well, why would you want to keep me from going to the temple?’ ” Romney’s answer, Dushku said, was biting. “He said, ‘Well, Judy, I just don’t understand why you stay in the church.’ ” She asked him whether he wanted her to really answer that question. “And he said, ‘No, actually. I don’t understand it, but I also don’t care. I don’t care why you do. But I can tell you one thing: you’re not my kind of Mormon.’ ” With that, Dushku said, he dismissively signed her recommendation to visit the temple and let her go. Dushku was deeply hurt. Though she and Romney had had their differences, he was still her spiritual leader. She had hoped he would be excited at her yearning to visit the temple. “I’m coming to you as a member of the church, essentially expecting you to say, ‘I’m happy for you,’ ” Dushku said. Instead, “I just felt kicked in the stomach.”
The Bain of Mitt’s Campaign

By the time Mitt Romney walked into the Faneuil Hall offices of his mentor and boss, Bill Bain, in the spring of 1983, the 36-year-old was already a business-consulting star, coveted by clients for his analytical cool. He was, as people had said of him since childhood, mature beyond his years and organized to a fault. Everything he took on was thought through in advance, down to the smallest detail; he was rarely taken by surprise. This day, however, would be an exception. Bill Bain, the founder of Bain & Company, one of the nation’s premier consulting outfits, had a stunning proposition: he was prepared to entrust an entirely new venture to the striking young man seated before him.

From the moment they’d first met, Bill Bain had seen something special, something he knew, in Mitt Romney. Indeed, he had seen someone he knew when he interviewed Romney for a job in 1977: Mitt’s father. “I remember [George] as president of American Motors when he was fighting the gas guzzlers and making funny ads So when I saw Mitt, I instantly saw George Romney. He doesn’t look exactly like his dad did, but he very strongly resembles his father.” Beyond appearances, Mitt had an air of great promise about him. He seemed brilliant but not cocky. All of the partners were impressed, and some were jealous. More than one partner told Bain, “This guy is going to be president of the United States someday.”

The Bain Way, as it became known, was intensely analytical and data-driven, a quality it shared with some other firms’ methods. But Bill Bain had come up with the idea of working for just one client per industry and devoting Bain & Company entirely to that company, with a strict vow of confidentiality. From the start Romney was perfectly adapted to the Bain Way and became a devoted disciple. Patient analysis and attention to nuance were what drove him. For six years, he delved into numerous unfamiliar companies, learned what made them work, scoped out the competition, and then presented his findings. An increasing number of clients preferred Romney over more senior partners. He was plainly a star, and Bain treated him as a kind of prince regent at the firm, a favored son. Just the man for the big move he now had in mind.

And so Bain made his pitch: Up to that point, Bain & Company could watch its clients prosper only from a distance, taking handsome fees but not directly sharing in profits. Bain’s epiphany was that he would create a new enterprise that would invest in companies and share in their growth, rather than just advise them.

Starting almost immediately, Bain proposed, Romney would become the head of a new company to be called Bain Capital. With seed money from Bill Bain and other partners at the consulting firm, Bain Capital would raise tens of millions of dollars, invest in start-ups and troubled businesses, apply Bain’s brand of management advice, and then resell the revitalized companies or sell their shares to the public at a profit. It sounded exciting, daring, new. It would be Romney’s first chance to run his own firm and, potentially, to make a killing. It was an offer few young men in a hurry could refuse.

Yet Romney stunned his boss by doing just that. He explained to Bain that he didn’t want to risk his position, earnings, and reputation on an experiment. He found the offer appealing but didn’t want to make the decision in a “light or flippant manner.” So Bain sweetened the pot. He guaranteed that if the experiment failed Romney would get his old job and salary back, plus any raises he would have earned during his absence. Still, Romney worried about the impact on his reputation if he proved unable to do the job. Again the pot was sweetened. Bain promised that, if necessary, he would craft a cover story saying that Romney’s return to Bain & Company was needed due to his value as a consultant. “So,” Bain explained, “there was no professional or financial risk.” This time Romney said yes.

Thus began Romney’s 15-year odyssey at Bain Capital. Boasting about those years when running for senator, governor, or president, Romney would usually talk about how he had helped create jobs at new or underperforming companies, and would claim that he had learned how jobs and businesses come and go. He’d typically mention a few well-known companies in which he and his partners had invested, such as Staples. But the full story of his years at Bain Capital is far more complicated and has rarely been closely scrutinized. Romney was involved in about a hundred deals, many of which have received little notice because the companies involved were privately held and not household names. The most thorough analysis of Romney’s performance comes from a private solicitation for investment in Bain Capital’s funds written by the Wall Street firm Deutsche Bank. The company examined 68 major deals that had taken place on Romney’s watch. Of those, Bain had lost money or broken even on 33. Overall, though, the numbers were stunning: Bain was nearly doubling its investors’ money annually, giving it one of the best track records in the business.

Romney was, by nature, deeply risk-averse in a business based on risk. He worried about losing the money of his partners and his outside investors—not to mention his own savings. “He was troubled when we didn’t invest fast enough; he was troubled when we made an investment,” said Bain partner Coleman Andrews. Sorting through possible investments, Romney met weekly with his young partners, pushing them for deeper analysis and more data and giving himself the final vote on whether to go forward. They operated more like a group of bankers carefully guarding their cash than an aggressive firm eager to embrace giant deals. Some partners suspected that Romney always had one eye on his political future. “I always wondered about Mitt, whether he was concerned about the blemishes from a business perspective or from a personal and political perspective,” one partner said years later. The partner concluded that it was the latter. Whereas most entrepreneurs accepted failure as an inherent part of the game, the partner said, Romney worried that a single flop would bring disgrace. Every calculation had to be made with care.

Despite some initial struggles, 1986 would prove to be a pivotal year for Romney. It started with a most unlikely deal. A former supermarket executive, Thomas Stemberg, was trying to sell venture capitalists on what seemed like a modest idea: a cheaper way to sell paper clips, pens, and other office supplies. The enterprise that would become the superstore Staples at first met with skepticism. Small and midsize businesses at the time bought most of their supplies from local stationers, often at significant markups. Few people saw the profit-margin potential in selling such homely goods at discount and in massive volume. But Stemberg was convinced and hired an investment banker to help raise money. Romney eventually heard Stemberg’s pitch, and he and his partners dug into Stemberg’s projections. They called lawyers, accountants, and scores of business owners in the Boston area to query them on how much they spent on supplies and whether they’d be willing to shop at a large new store. The partners initially concluded that Stemberg was overestimating the market. “Look,” Stemberg told Romney, “your mistake is that the guys you called think they know what they spend, but they don’t.” Romney and Bain Capital went back to the businesses and tallied up invoices. Stemberg’s assessment that this was a hidden giant of a market seemed right after all.

Romney hadn’t stumbled on Staples on his own. A partner at another Boston firm, Bessemer Venture Partners, had invited him to the first meeting with Stemberg. But after that, he took the lead; he finally had his hands on what looked like a promising start-up. Bain Capital invested $650,000 to help Staples open its first store, in Brighton, Massachusetts, in May 1986. In all, it invested about $2.5 million in the company. Three years later, in 1989, Staples sold shares to the public, when it was just barely turning a profit, and Bain reaped more than $13 million. It was a big success at the time. Yet it was very modest compared with later Bain deals that reached into the hundreds of millions of dollars.

For years Romney would cite the Staples investment as proof that he had helped create thousands of jobs. And it is true that his foresight in investing in Staples helped a major enterprise lift off. But neither Romney nor Bain directly ran the business, though Romney was active on its board. At the initial public offering, Staples was a firm of 24 stores and 1,100 full- and part-time jobs. Its boom years were still to come. Romney resigned his seat on the board of directors in 2001 in preparation for his run for governor. A decade later, the company had more than 2,200 stores and 89,000 employees.

Assessing claims about job creation is hard. Staples grew hugely, but the gains were offset, at least partially, by losses elsewhere: smaller, mom-and-pop stationery stores and suppliers were being squeezed, and some went out of business entirely. Ultimately, Romney would approvingly call Staples “a classic ‘category killer,’ like Toys R Us.” Staples steamrolled the competition, undercutting prices and selling in large quantities. When asked about his job-creation claim during the 1994 Senate campaign—that he had helped create 10,000 jobs at various companies (a claim he expanded during his 2012 presidential campaign to having “helped to create tens of thousands” of jobs)—Romney responded with a careful hedge. He emphasized that he always used the word “helped” and didn’t take full credit for the jobs. “That’s why I’m always very careful to use the words ‘help create,’ ” he acknowledged. “Bain Capital, or Mitt Romney, ‘helped create’ over 10,000 jobs. I don’t take credit for the jobs at Staples. I helped create the jobs at Staples.”

Howard Anderson, a professor at M.I.T.’s Sloan School of Management and a former entrepreneur who has invested with Bain, put it more plainly: “What you really cannot do is claim every job was because of your good judgment,” he said. “You’re not really running those organizations. You’re financing it; you’re offering your judgment and your advice. I think you can only really claim credit for the jobs of the company that you ran.”

The same year Romney invested in Staples—digging into a true start-up—he also inked the biggest transaction, by far, that Bain Capital had put together until then. And with this $200 million deal, he waded full-on into the high-stakes financial arena of the time: leveraged buyouts, or LBOs. Whereas a venture-capital deal bet on a new business, pursuing an LBO meant borrowing huge sums of money to buy an established company, typically saddling the target with big debts. The goal was to mine value that others had missed, to quickly improve profitability by cutting costs and often jobs, and then to sell.

Initially, Romney thought that putting money into young firms “would be just as good as acquiring an existing company and trying to make it better.” But he found that “there’s a lot greater risk in a start-up than there is in acquiring an existing company.” He was much more comfortable in an environment where the issue wasn’t whether an idea would pan out but whether the numbers worked. He knew himself, knew that his powers ran less to the creative than to the analytical; he was not at heart an entrepreneur. Perhaps that was what led him to push the Pause button at the outset with Bill Bain. But he now felt ready to take on much bigger financial risks, mostly by making leveraged bets on existing companies, whose market was known and whose business plans he could parse and master.

Billions of dollars were being made in the field of leveraged buyouts in the roaring 80s, and Romney was fully in the game, continuing to ratchet up his favored strategy. On the campaign trail in 2011, Romney said his work had “led me to become very deeply involved in helping other businesses, from start-ups to large companies that were going through tough times. Sometimes I was successful and we were able to help create jobs, other times I wasn’t. I learned how America competes with other companies in other countries, what works in the real world and what doesn’t.” It was a vague summary of what was a very controversial type of business. In his 2004 autobiography, Turnaround, Romney put it more bluntly: “I never actually ran one of our investments; that was left to management.” He explained that his strategy was to “invest in these underperforming companies, using the equivalent of a mortgage to leverage up our investment. Then we would go to work to help management make their business more successful.”

Romney’s phrase, “leverage up,” provides the key to understanding this most profitable stage of his business career. While putting relatively little money on the table, Bain could strike a deal using largely debt. That generally meant that the company being acquired had to borrow huge sums. But there was no guarantee that target companies would be able to repay their debts. At Bain, the goal was to buy businesses that were stagnating as subsidiaries of large corporations and grow them or shake them up to burnish their performance. Because many of the companies were troubled, or at least were going to be heavily indebted after Bain bought them, their bonds would be considered lower-grade, or “junk.” That meant they would have to pay higher interest on the bonds, like a strapped credit-card holder facing a higher rate than a person who pays off purchases more quickly. High-yielding junk bonds were appealing to investors willing to take on risk in exchange for big payouts. But they also represented a big bet: if the companies didn’t generate large profits or could not sell their stock to the public, some would be crippled by the debt layered on them by the buyout firms.

The arcane domain of corporate buyouts and junk-bond financing had entered the public consciousness at the time, and not always in a positive way. Ivan Boesky, a Wall Street arbitrageur who often bought the stock of takeover targets, was charged with insider trading and featured on the cover of Time magazine as “Ivan the Terrible.” Shortly after Romney began working on leveraged deals, a movie called Wall Street opened. It featured the fictional corporate raider Gordon Gekko, who justified his behavior by declaring, “I am not a destroyer of companies. I am a liberator of them! … Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.”

Romney, of course, never said that greed is good, and there was nothing of Gekko in his mores or style. But he bought into the broader ethic of the LBO kings, who believed that through the aggressive use of leverage and skilled management they could quickly remake underperforming enterprises. Romney described himself as driven by a core economic credo, that capitalism is a form of “creative destruction.” This theory, espoused in the 1940s by the economist Joseph Schumpeter and later touted by former Federal Reserve Board chairman Alan Greenspan, holds that business must exist in a state of ceaseless revolution. A thriving economy changes from within, Schumpeter wrote in his landmark book, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, “incessantly destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one.” But as even the theory’s proponents acknowledged, such destruction could bankrupt companies, upending lives and communities, and raise questions about society’s role in softening some of the harsher consequences.

Romney, for his part, contrasted the capitalistic benefits of creative destruction with what happened in controlled economies, in which jobs might be protected but productivity and competitiveness falters. Far better, Romney wrote in his book No Apology, “for governments to stand aside and allow the creative destruction inherent in a free economy.” He acknowledged that it is “unquestionably stressful—on workers, managers, owners, bankers, suppliers, customers, and the communities that surround the affected businesses.” But it was necessary to rebuild a moribund company and economy. It was a point of view he would stick with in years ahead. Indeed, he wrote a 2008 op-ed piece for The New York Times opposing a federal bailout for automakers that the newspaper headlined, let detroit go bankrupt. His advice went unheeded, and his prediction that “you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye” if it got a bailout has not come true.

Thanks to a highly leveraged but successful takeover and turnaround of a wheel-rim maker, Accuride, Bain Capital became a hot property. So much money poured into Romney’s second investment fund that the firm had to turn away investors. Romney set out to raise $80 million and received offers totaling $150 million. The partners settled on $105 million, half of it from wealthy customers of a New York bank. During a break at a photo shoot for a brochure to attract investors, the Bain partners playfully posed for a photo that showed them flush with cash. They clutched $10 and $20 bills, stuffed them into their pockets, and even clenched them in their grinning teeth. Romney tucked a bill between his striped tie and his buttoned suit jacket. Everything was different now.
Valley of the LBO Kings

It was time for another road show, but the days of soliciting prospects for scarce cash in obscure locales were mostly over. This time Romney and his partners headed to Beverly Hills, California. Arriving at the intersection of Rodeo Drive and Wilshire Boulevard, they headed to the office of Michael Milken, the canny and controversial junk-bond king, at his company, Drexel Burnham Lambert. Romney knew Milken was able to find buyers for the high-yield, high-risk bonds that were crucial to the success of many leveraged-buyout deals. At the time of Romney’s visit, it was widely known that Drexel and Milken were under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. But Drexel was still the big player in the junk-bond business, and Romney needed the financing.

Romney had come to Drexel to obtain financing for the $300 million purchase of two Texas department-store chains, Bealls and Palais Royal, to form Specialty Retailers, Inc. On September 7, 1988, two months after Bain hired Drexel to issue junk bonds to finance the deal, the S.E.C. filed a complaint against Drexel and Milken for insider trading. Romney had to decide whether to close a deal with a company ensnared in a growing clash with regulators. The old Romney might well have backed off; the newly assertive, emboldened Mitt decided to press ahead.

Romney’s deal with Drexel turned out well for both him and Bain Capital, which put $10 million into the retailer and financed most of the rest of the $300 million deal with junk bonds. The newly constituted company, later known as Stage Stores, refocused in 1989 on its small-town, small-department-store roots. Seven years later, in October 1996, the company successfully sold shares to the public at $16 a share. By the following year, the stock had climbed to a high of nearly $53, and Bain Capital and a number of its officers and directors sold a large part of their holdings. Bain made a $175 million gain by 1997. It was one of the most profitable leveraged buyouts of the era.

Romney sold at just the right time. Shares plunged in value the next year amid declining sales at the stores. The department-store company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2000, struggling with $600 million in debt, and a reorganized company emerged the following year. So ended the story of a deal that Romney would not be likely to cite on the campaign trail: the highly leveraged purchase, financed with junk bonds from a firm that became infamous for its financial practices, of a department-store company that had subsequently gone into bankruptcy. But on the Bain balance sheet, and on Romney’s, it was a huge win.

Not every deal worked out so well for Romney and his investors. Bain invested $4 million in a company called Handbag Holdings, which sold pocketbooks and other accessories. When a major customer stopped buying, the company failed and 200 jobs were lost. Bain invested $2.1 million in a bathroom-fixtures company called PPM and lost nearly all of it. An investment in a company called Mothercare Stores also didn’t pan out; the firm had eliminated a hundred jobs by the time Bain dumped it. Fellow Bain partner Robert White said Bain lost its $1 million and blamed “a difficult retail environment.”

In some cases, Bain Capital’s alternative strategy of buying into companies also ended in trouble. In 1993, Bain bought GST Steel, a maker of steel-wire rods, and later more than doubled its $24 million investment. The company borrowed heavily to modernize plants in Kansas City and North Carolina—and to pay out dividends to Bain. But foreign competition increased and steel prices fell. GST Steel filed for bankruptcy and shut down its money-losing Kansas City plant, throwing some 750 employees out of work. Union workers there blamed Bain, then and now, for ruining the company, upending their lives, and devastating the community.

Then, in 1994, Bain invested $27 million as part of a deal with other firms to acquire Dade International, a medical-diagnostics-equipment firm, from its parent company, Baxter International. Bain ultimately made nearly 10 times its money, getting back $230 million. But Dade wound up laying off more than 1,600 people and filed for bankruptcy protection in 2002, amid crushing debt and rising interest rates. The company, with Bain in charge, had borrowed heavily to do acquisitions, accumulating $1.6 billion in debt by 2000. The company cut benefits for some workers at the acquired firms and laid off others. When it merged with Behring Diagnostics, a German company, Dade shut down three U.S. plants. At the same time, Dade paid out $421 million to Bain Capital’s investors and investing partners.

The amount of money now being earned at Bain Capital was skyrocketing, and much of it came from a handful of giant deals. During Romney’s 15 years there, the firm invested about $260 million in its 10 top deals and reaped a nearly $3 billion return. That was about three-quarters of its overall profit on roughly 100 transactions during Romney’s tenure. In one of his most specific explanations of how he made his fortune, in his autobiography, Turnaround, Romney wrote that most of the companies he invested in were ones that “no one has heard of—TRW’s credit services, the Yellow Pages of Italy.” Those weren’t just any two deals. They were two of the most lucrative of Romney’s career, and luck played a big part in both. A mere seven weeks after buying TRW, Romney and his partners flipped the company. Bain’s $100 million investment returned at least $300 million. The second deal cited by Romney took longer but involved even more good timing and luck. It began with a renowned Italian investor named Phil Cuneo, who had the idea of buying the Italian version of the Yellow Pages. It seemed a solid investment in a firm with a staid and stable business model. But mere months after closing the deal, Cuneo and his Bain associates realized that they had acquired a company that might benefit from the surging interest in dot-com businesses; the Yellow Pages company owned a Web-based directory that had the potential to be the Italian version of America Online or Yahoo. In just under three years, in September 2000, the partners sold the investment, earning a windfall that far exceeded anyone’s initial expectations. Bain’s $51.3 million investment in the Italian Yellow Pages returned at least $1.17 billion, according to a Romney associate familiar with the deal. There is no public documentation of how the profits were distributed, but at that time at least 20 percent of the return would have gone to Bain Capital. Of that, Romney’s typical payout was then 5 to 10 percent. That means this one obscure deal would have given him a profit of $11 million to $22 million. If Romney made a side investment in the deal, as was standard among Bain partners, he would have made even larger gains. One Romney associate said Romney’s total profit could have been as much as $40 million. (A Romney spokesman did not respond to questions about the deal.)

It was those kinds of deals that enabled Bain Capital to report the highest returns in the business in the 1990s. Romney’s own net worth would grow to at least $250 million, and maybe much more, a trove that would enable him to foot a large part of the bill for his 2008 presidential campaign. Asked about a report that his wealth at one point reached as high as $1 billion, Romney said, “I’m not going to get into my net worth. No estimates whatsoever.”

For 15 years, Romney had been in the business of creative destruction and wealth creation. But what about his claims of job creation? Though Bain Capital surely helped expand some companies that had created jobs, the layoffs and closures at other firms would lead Romney’s political opponents to say that he had amassed a fortune in part by putting people out of work. The lucrative deals that made Romney wealthy could exact a cost. Maximizing financial return to investors could mean slashing jobs, closing plants, and moving production overseas. It could also mean clashing with union workers, serving on the board of a company that ran afoul of federal laws, and loading up already struggling companies with debt.

There is a difference between companies run by buyout firms and those rooted in their communities, according to Ross Gittell, a professor at the University of New Hampshire’s Whittemore School of Business and Economics. When it comes to buyout firms, he said, “the objective is: Make money for investors. It’s not to maximize jobs.” Romney, in fact, had a fiduciary duty to investors to make as much money as possible. Sometimes everything worked out perfectly; a change in strategy might lead to cost savings and higher profits, and Bain cashed in. Sometimes jobs were lost, and Bain cashed in or lost part or all of its investment. In the end, Romney’s winners outweighed his losers on the Bain balance sheet. Marc Wolpow, a former Bain partner who worked with Romney on many deals, said the discussion at buyout companies typically does not focus on whether jobs will be created. “It’s the opposite—what jobs we can cut,” Wolpow said. “Because you had to document how you were going to create value. Eliminating redundancy, or the elimination of people, is a very valid way. Businesses will die if you don’t do that. I think the way Mitt should explain it is, if we didn’t buy these businesses and impose efficiencies on them, the market would have done it with disastrous consequences.”

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2012/02/mitt-romney-201202.print

Jordan

  • Guest
Mitt Romney Job Creator?
« Reply #48 on: January 07, 2012, 06:57:14 pm »
This man lost his job because of Mitt Romney, so he made an ad to fight back


MItt Romney cares about American jobs? This victim of a Bain Capital take over begs to differ.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IIUNtHm22-Q

Jordan

  • Guest
WUT?
« Reply #49 on: January 07, 2012, 07:22:09 pm »
With two Catholics in the race, the Vatican endorses....Romney


Five former ambassadors to the Vatican endorsed Mitt Romney on Saturday, choosing a Mormon over two Roman Catholic rivals in the race for the Republican presidential nomination.

In a statement showcased by Mr. Romney’s campaign, the ambassadors said they “are united in our wholehearted support for the candidacy of Mitt Romney for the Presidency of the United States because of his commitment to and support of the values that we feel are critical in a national leader.”

Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum are both Catholics and often talk about their religion and values on the campaign trail.

The endorsements could also help blunt any under-the-radar attacks by religious conservatives who oppose Mr. Romney because of his religion. Last year, some evangelical leaders called Mormonism a cult.

That might be especially helpful to Mr. Romney in South Carolina, even though it has only a small number of Catholics. Religious conservatives there have traditionally played a large role in the primary where tough, negative campaigning is the norm.

In the statement, the ambassadors cited what they said was Mr. Romney’s commitment to “traditional values” and said that because of his “outstanding record in defense of marriage and the family, we are confident that he understands the importance of strong families as pillars of a vibrant economy and a flourishing polity.”

According to the statement, the ambassadors are:

Thomas Patrick Melady (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 1989-1993)
Raymond L. Flynn (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 1993-1997)
James Nicholson (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 2001-2005)
Francis Rooney (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 2005-2008)
Mary Ann Glendon (U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See 2008-2009)


http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/holy-see-ambassadors-endorse-romney/

Jordan

  • Guest
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #50 on: January 07, 2012, 07:29:38 pm »

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Are "Republicans" and "Republican-leaning independents" really THAT stupid???
« Reply #51 on: January 08, 2012, 03:06:54 am »
http://www.gallup.com/poll/151931/Romney-Santorum-Rising-Nationally-Iowa.aspx

Romney, Santorum Rising Nationally After Iowa

Santorum up in the last two days, but still behind Romney

by Frank Newport
Gallup
January 6, 2012

PRINCETON, NJ -- Mitt Romney remains the first choice of registered Republican voters nationally in Gallup Daily tracking of the GOP race. He holds a 27% to 19% lead over Newt Gingrich, followed by Rick Santorum with 15% and Ron Paul with 12%. These results, based on interviewing conducted Dec. 29-Jan. 5, give Romney one of his largest leads over a competitor to date.

    

The interviewing period included in the latest report straddles the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses in which Romney edged out Santorum by eight votes, with Paul in third place.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Jordan

  • Guest
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #52 on: January 09, 2012, 02:34:05 pm »
Romney Continues Slide in N.H. Poll - Jim O'Sullivan - NationalJournal.com
New Hampshire voters love Mitt Romney, they’re just not in love with him, according to a tracking poll released Sunday morning.

Romney, who still holds a commanding 15-point lead, slipped for the fourth consecutive day in the Suffolk University/7News two-day tracking poll, dropping four points to 35 percent, a total fall of eight points since Tuesday.

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, is in second with 20 percent, up four points from Tuesday. The candidate who has paid the most attention to the Granite State, Jon Huntsman, holds third place with 11 percent, trailed by Newt Gingrich at 9 percent and second-place Iowa finisher Rick Santorum at 8 percent.

Santorum has been drawing strong crowds in New Hampshire and, by virtue of his Iowa performance, generating heavy media attention. At a Saturday-afternoon event in Hollis, a barn hit overflow capacity and forced onlookers to climb into the rafters to hear him speak, while more than a hundred more milled around outside. Several heavyweight reporters from major media organizations were on hand.

But so far there is trace evidence that Santorum has converted that buzz into an elevated standing in the polls.

The statewide poll spoke with 250 respondents on both Jan. 6 and Jan.7 for a two-day total of 500 likely voters, and carries an error margin of plus/minus 4.4 percentage points.

All of the calls for the poll were completed prior to the start of Saturday night’s debate, Suffolk said, which came just 12 hours before a second, far feistier debate Sunday morning.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/romney-continues-slide-in-n-h-poll-20120108

Jordan

  • Guest
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #53 on: January 13, 2012, 01:11:53 pm »
Flip Flop Romney - Slams Romney Thinks auditing the fed is a bad idea.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EQwrB1vu74c

Jordan

  • Guest
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #54 on: January 13, 2012, 02:17:13 pm »
Romney's wealth puts him in the .001 percent of Americans.

The Romney campaign's "Bain problem," which is also now the Republican party's problem, doesn't look like it's going away anytime soon. Sure, Republicans are figuring out that this is not a winning issue for them. Thus they've circled their wagons around Romney, and even tried to get Newt to turn it down a couple of notches. Even the funder who gave Newt the money to green-light "When Mitt Romney Came To Down" is having second thoughts.

But never mind all that. The story has now gotten big enough to draw Sarah Palin out of an extended break from her bus tour, to advise Romney to open up the books on his tenure at Bain.

    Republican star and Fox News political analyst Sarah Palin said criticism of Mitt Romney's record at Bain Capital by some Republican rivals is fair game and that voters should get "proof" of the 100,000 jobs Mr. Romney said he helped create while he headed the private equity firm.

    In an interview with Fox host Sean Hannity Wednesday, Ms. Palin was asked about Texas Gov. Rick Perry's comments that Mr. Romney had practiced "vulture capitalism" rather than venture capitalism at Bain. Fox and The Wall Street Journal are owned by News Corp.

    "I don't agree with attacks on free-market capitalism at all but I don't believe this is really what is at the heart of Gov. Perry's criticism of Romney and his time at Bain," the former Alaska governor replied.  "This isn't about a politician making huge profits in the private sector. I think what Gov. Perry is getting at is that Gov. Romney has claimed to have created 100,000 jobs at Bain and you know, now people are wanting to know is there proof of that claim."

In a similar vein, Palin called on Romney to (finally) release his tax returns.

    Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin suggested Wednesday that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney should release his tax returns, as well as records from his time at Bain Capital.

    "What I heard was a little bit what's going on today is some inoculation of the candidate himself, the frontrunner, and what it is that he's going to face when he comes up against Barack Obama. Nobody should be surprised that things about Bain Capital, and maybe tax returns not being released yet, and maybe some records not being as transparently provided to the public as voters deserve to see right now, don't be surprised that's all coming out today," she told Sean Hannity Wednesday on Fox News. "Let's get it out there, let's hear the defense of the candidates who are being charged with some of this. It's kind of like some come-to-Jesus moments for these candidates, and that's good, that's healthy."

Mitt Romney, Mr. 1% - Cartoon The problem is, "free enterprise" is not on trial, and Bain isn't so much the representative of capitalism as the Frankenstein monster of capitalism stitched together and brought to life by conservative policy.

As a former manager at Bain made plain in an LA Time interview, job creation was never the mission at Bain Capital. So, there's very little evidence to support Romney's claim of creating 100,000 jobs at Bain. Bain won't release its overall record of jobs lost or created. Probably because it wasn't anybody's job to create jobs at Bain. Ask them about how much they returned to investors they can probably do that. Creating wealth was the job at Bain, not creating jobs. And we've already had a decade of the Bush tax cuts benefiting the wealthy, the rich getting richer, and zero job growth to teach us that creating wealth doesn't necessarily lead to job creation.

Warren Buffet, in a Time Magazine interview, made clear another reason why Romney couldn't follow Palin's advice if he wanted to.

    When I ask whether Mitt Romney is a job creator or destroyer, Buffett says that while businesses shouldn't keep people they don't need, "I don't like what private-equity firms do in terms of taking out every dime they can and leveraging [companies] up so that they really aren't equipped, in some cases, for the future."

Even without a release from Bain, we what we know about one of Bain's acquisitions — in which Romney was a very hands-on manager — is exactly what Buffet described.

    But an examination of the Dade deal, which Mr. Romney approved and presided over, shows the unintended human costs and messy financial consequences behind the brand of capitalism that he practiced for 15 years.

    At Bain Capital’s direction, Dade quadrupled the money it owed creditors and vendors. It took steps that propelled the business toward bankruptcy. And in waves of layoffs, it cut loose 1,700 workers in the United States, including Brian and Christine Shoemaker, who lost their jobs at a plant in Westwood, Mass. Staggered, Mr. Shoemaker wondered, “How can the bean counters just come in here and say, Hey, it’s over?”

Why release records on jobs created or destroyed and risk confirming stories like the one above?

That brings me to why Romney can't exactly follow Palin's advice on taxes. Certainly not now, anyway, with a majority of Americans citing economic inequality as a source of conflict, Newt shining a spotlight on Mitt's vulture capitalism, and voters in the 99% steering clear of him.

If he releases his tax returns Romney runs the risk, in the current climate, of revealing just how rich he is. For the record, according to Wealth-X, he's one of the 10 richest people to run for president in the last 20 years. His net worth of $250 million makes him the third richest person to seek the oval office, after Ross Perot (#1) and Steve Forbes (#2).

Romney's wealth makes him one of the 3,140 wealthiest people in the country — that's the richest 0.001 percent of Americans. So, he's not just the candidate of the 1 percent, but the candidate of the 0.001 percent.

Releasing his tax returns would just confirm to many American voters that Romney got rich by practicing the very brand of vulture capitalism Buffet criticized, which is exactly what Newt accused him of.

Unfortunately for Romney, I think all of this is already but confirmed for a good many Americans.


http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2012010213/palin-advises-romney-bain

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Romney and Obama Share Same Bankster Campaign Contributors
« Reply #55 on: January 17, 2012, 02:12:38 pm »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/romney-and-obama-share-same-bankster-campaign-contributors.html

Romney and Obama Share Same Bankster Campaign Contributors

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 17, 2012

Like Obama, Mitt Romney is a wind-up doll for Wall Street and the bankers. There is virtually no difference between them despite all the fetid air from the GOP propaganda machine.


Romney’s Bain Capital owns the “conservative” propaganda machine,
Clear Channel.


This is revealed by a quick look at Romney’s top contributors. An Open Secrets page on top Romney contributors reads like a Who’s Who of Wall Street and the financial cartel. The top contributor is Goldman Sachs, followed by Credit Suisse Group, Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, UBS, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Barclays – major players in the Wall Street and City of London bankster constellation.

Bain Capital is also on the list. It is a “financial services” and investment firm co-founded by Romney. Bain owns the establishment media propaganda conglomerate Clear Channel, which explains why “conservative” talk show hosts like Limbaugh, Hannity and Levin are supporting Romney, especially with the strong showing of Ron Paul in the primaries. Both Savage (real name Weiner) and Levin have gone so far as to call Paul a threat to the country.

In December, Mitt refused to release the identity of his “bundlers,” or people who gather contributions from many individuals in an organization or community and give the cash to the campaign.

In other words, the above list is only the tip of the iceberg. Romney’s lack of transparency about his bundlers indicates he is getting money from sources that want their identity concealed.

In November, it was reported that Jimmy Lee, a veteran Wall Street investment banker, and three other top executives at JPMorgan Chase & Co hosted a $2,500-per-person reception for Romney.

“I am committed to doing all that I can to help his campaign because I also believe he is the strongest challenger to President Obama,” Lee told Reuters. Lee said he has known Romney for almost all of his Wall Street career and that he made one of the first loans to Romney at Bain Capital.

It is not clear why Mr. Lee opposes Obama – his campaign contributors are almost a carbon copy of Mitt’s. Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan (where Lee worked), Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, USB and many of the same players donated heavily to Obama’s campaign in 2008.

It should be obvious by now that the dog and pony show known as the “election cycle” in the United States is a musical chairs affair with the same gaggle of bankers and transnational corporations calling the shots.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Jordan

  • Guest
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #56 on: January 17, 2012, 02:45:02 pm »
Bain Capital Buys Stake in Huntsman Chemical - NYT (2001)

The Huntsman Corporation, a leading chemical company, said yesterday that Bain Capital Inc., the buyout firm that owns Domino's Pizza and Sealy Mattress, agreed to buy a $600 million stake in the closely held business. Huntsman said it would use part of the money to buy out Imperial Chemical Industries' 30 percent share of Huntsman. Huntsman, which is based in Salt Lake City, makes plastics, footwear, paints, coatings and construction materials.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/24/business/company-news-bain-capital-buys-stake-in-huntsman-chemical-company.html

notanumber

  • Guest
Re: Romney and Obama Share Same Bankster Campaign Contributors
« Reply #57 on: January 17, 2012, 03:23:52 pm »
"I think the puppet on the right shares my beliefs. I think the puppet on the left is more to my liking. Hey, wait a minute, ... There's one guy holding up both puppets!"---Bill Hicks

http://youtu.be/06fCDiu9HiA

“Go back to bed, America, your government has figured out how it all transpired. Go back to bed America, your government is in control. Here, here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up, go back to bed America, here is American Gladiators, here is 56 channels of it! Watch these pituitary retards bang their f--king skulls together and congratulate you on the living in the land of freedom. Here you go America - you are free to do what we tell you! You are free to do what we tell you!”

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Romney Would Sign NDAA
« Reply #58 on: January 17, 2012, 07:20:38 pm »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/romney-would-sign-ndaa.html

Romney Would Sign NDAA

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
January 17, 2012

During the latest “debate” in South Carolina, Mitt Romney said that if he were president he would sign the National Defense Authorization Act.

     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1yY3NCiMVQ

Prior to his recent assertion that it is perfectly normal to dispense with the Fourth Amendment and suspend habeas corpus, Romney said he wasn’t up to speed on the law and promised to post an analysis on his website, which he never did.

Romney said you don’t have the “right to join a group that has challenged America” and then mentioned al-Qaeda, the terror group that the FBI admits poses little threat to the nation.

The NDAA, however, is not about indefinitely detaining Muslim cave dwellers. It’s about disappearing American citizens who oppose the bankster cartel now in control of the government.

The law is a “violent and sudden usurpation” of the Constitution of the sort James Madison warned about. The founders considered habeas corpus the most fundamental of rights because it insured that the executive branch could not hold people without cause. It was so important the founders included it in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Constitution.

Truman tried to veto the Internal Security Act of 1950 that codified indefinite detention without trial but he was overturned by Congress.Truman said it was “the greatest danger to freedom of speech, press, and assembly” since the Alien and Sedition Laws of 1798 and represented a “mockery of the Bill of Rights” and was a “long step toward totalitarianism.”

In the years after Truman’s warning, the government slowly chipped away at the Fourth Amendment and habeas corpus as it passed the McCartney-Walter Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (following the Oklahoma false flag), the Patriot Act (following the 9/11 false flag), and has finally repealed the cornerstone of the Bill of Rights with the passage of the NDAA.

As Sherwood Ross notes, with the passage of the NDAA, we have returned “to the disgraceful Korematsu Era, when President Roosevelt ordered the military to round up law-abiding Japanese-American citizens and stick them in concentration camps for the duration of World War II.”

World War II, however, had an end, whereas the bogus war on terrorism is designed to last forever, as our leaders have stated on a number of occasions.

Romney has no opinion on the Constitution, Magna Carta, and centuries of common law. He is an empty vessel filled up with nonsense produced by the global elite who run the disgusting dog and pony shows that now pass as elections in the United States.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline jofortruth

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,862
    • The Great Deception
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #59 on: January 17, 2012, 07:38:26 pm »
A Video further exposing Romney's admission last night that he supports NDAA, and Ron Paul's response:

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=226722.0
Don't believe me. Look it up yourself!

The Great Deception - Forum/Library - My Research
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showforum=110

Jordan

  • Guest
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #60 on: January 18, 2012, 10:42:56 pm »



Although it is not apparent on his financial disclosure form, Mitt Romney has millions of dollars of his personal wealth in investment funds set up in the Cayman Islands, a notorious Caribbean tax haven.

A spokesperson for the Romney campaign says Romney follows all tax laws and he would pay the same in taxes regardless of where the funds are based.

As the race for the Republican nomination heats up, Mitt Romney is finding it increasingly difficult to maintain a shroud of secrecy around the details about his vast personal wealth, including, as ABC News has discovered, his investment in funds located offshore and his ability to pay a lower tax rate.

"His personal finances are a poster child of what's wrong with the American tax system," said Jack Blum, a Washington lawyer who is an authority on tax enforcement and offshore banking.

On Tuesday, Romney disclosed that he has been paying a far lower percentage in taxes than most Americans, around 15 percent of his annual earnings. It has been Romney's Republican rivals who have driven the tax issue onto center stage. For weeks, Romney has cited a desire for privacy as his reason for not sharing his tax returns -- a gesture of transparency that is now expected from presidential contenders.

"I can tell you we follow the tax laws," he said recently while on the campaign trail in New Hampshire. "And if there's an opportunity to save taxes, we like anybody else in this country will follow that opportunity."

But tax experts tell ABC News there are other reasons Romney may not want the public viewing his returns. As one of the wealthiest candidates to run for president in recent times, Romney has used a variety of techniques to help minimize the taxes on his estimated $250 million fortune. In addition to paying the lower tax rate on his investment income, Romney has as much as $8 million invested in at least 12 funds listed on a Cayman Islands registry. Another investment, which Romney reports as being worth between $5 million and $25 million, shows up on securities records as having been domiciled in the Caymans.

Official documents reviewed by ABC News show that Bain Capital, the private equity partnership Romney once ran, has set up some 138 secretive offshore funds in the Caymans.

Romney campaign officials and those at Bain Capital tell ABC News that the purpose of setting up those accounts in the Cayman Islands is to help attract money from foreign investors, and that the accounts provide no tax advantage to American investors like Romney. Romney, the campaign said, has paid all U.S. taxes on income derived from those investments.

"The tax consequences to the Romneys are the very same whether the fund is domiciled here or another country," a campaign official said in response to questions. "Gov. and Mrs. Romney have money invested in funds that the trustee has determined to be attractive investment opportunities, and those funds are domiciled wherever the fund sponsors happen to organize the funds."

Bain officials called the decision to locate some funds offshore routine, and a benefit only to foreign investors who do not want to be subjected to U.S. taxes.

Tax experts agree that Romney remains subject to American taxes. But they say the offshore accounts have provided him -- and Bain -- with other potential financial benefits, such as higher management fees and greater foreign interest, all at the expense of the U.S. Treasury. Rebecca J. Wilkins, a tax policy expert with Citizens for Tax Justice, said the federal government loses an estimated $100 billion a year because of tax havens.

Blum, the D.C. tax lawyer, said working through an offshore investment vehicle allows the investor to "avoid a whole series of small traps in the tax code that ordinary people would face if they paid tax on an onshore basis."

Wilkins agreed, saying the "primary advantage to setting those funds up in an offshore jurisdiction like the Cayman Islands or Bermuda is it helps the investors avoid tax."

"It helps U.S. investors avoid U.S. tax," said Wilkins, "it helps foreign investors avoid taxes in their home country, so it's not illegal or improper to set those funds up in a foreign jurisdiction, but it makes it more attractive to investors because it helps them avoid paying taxes on that income."

Bain's presence in the Cayman Islands is not something the firm advertises. The Los Angeles Times first disclosed Romney's offshore accounts in 2007, during his initial run for the presidency. ABC News found references to the firm's accounts in the Caymans in the footnotes of securities filings. When ABC News went to the office address listed for Romney's Bain funds, lawyers in the Caymans were not eager to answer questions.

Asked if he could confirm the existence of the Bain accounts, David Byrne, the chief marketing officer for the law firm Walkers, listed on documents as Bain's Caymans' representative, said he could not. "No, I can't at all," said Byrne. "Unfortunately, I can't comment at all on that."

There is now less secrecy than there was even two weeks ago surrounding Romney's tax rate. The money he made through Bain investments was taxed as capital gains at a 15 percent rate, instead of the higher tax rates borne by most Americans. Newt Gingrich told reporters Wednesday that his income was taxed at 31 percent.

The so-called "carried interest" rule has been the source of extensive debate in Washington, with opponents criticizing the allowance to tax those earnings at 15 percent a glaring loophole that benefits only the wealthiest Americans. Under the carried interest rule, income that is determined to be capital gains – like the profit reaped by hedge fund managers -- is subject to the lower 15 percent rate.

Wilkins said Romney's arrangements reminded her of the now famous remarks by billionaire financier Warren Buffet, who revealed in 2007 that he was paying taxes at a lower rate than his receptionist.

"Well, I think it's the issue that is sort of on the front page every day, when we look at the Occupy Wall Street movement and that people are really losing patience with the idea that a lot of multinational corporations have and a lot of wealthy people have that while they benefit from everything this country has to offer … they don't seem to be willing to pay their fair share," she said.


http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/romney-parks-millions-offshore-tax-haven/story?id=15378566#.TxdiIHoXG5J

Jordan

  • Guest
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #61 on: January 27, 2012, 09:40:02 am »
Romney Failed to Disclose Swiss Bank Account Income

Mitt Romney's campaign is amending the financial disclosure form he filed in 2011 to acknowledge that a Romney trust earned interest income from a Swiss bank account, a detail that had been missing from the report.

"An amendment is being filed to address this minor discrepancy," a campaign official told ABC News in an email Thursday in response to questions about the apparent omission.

"The inescapable fact is that by releasing over 600 pages of information regarding his finances, Mitt Romney is clearly coming down on the side of disclosure," said Andrea Saul, a campaign spokeswoman, in a subsequent statement. "Any document with this level of complexity and detail is bound to have a few trivial inadvertent issues. We are in the process of putting together some minor technical amendments, which will not alter the overall picture of Gov. and Mrs. Romney's finances as disclosed in August."

The discovery that the Romneys had $3 million in an account with the Swiss bank UBS came only after the Republican presidential candidate released his tax returns for 2010 on Tuesday. The campaign had maintained that it was not necessary to disclose the Swiss account because Romney's money manager, Brad Malt, had shuttered it in early 2010.

Several Republican election lawyers told ABC News Thursday that the account still needed to be disclosed because a Romney trust earned about $1,700 in income on the account during 2010. The campaign's decision to amend the forms was first reported by the Los Angeles Times.

At the same time, questions from ABC News about undisclosed income that appeared on Newt Gingrich's tax return have led Gingrich to announce that he, too, will be amending his financial disclosure report. Gingrich's returns showed he received $252,500 in wages from Gingrich Holdings Inc. in 2010, but those wages do not appear anywhere on his presidential disclosure report.

"An internal account review found the need to amend the reporting," said a Gingrich campaign official. "It was done immediately."

Romney also decided to amend the report from his 2007 run for president, a decision first reported by the New York Times. That form identified a UBS money market account, but did not clarify that it was held by his wife's trust. UBS has branches in the United States, so it would not have been readily apparent that the account was in Switzerland. Those who track the finances of presidential candidates said they found the failures to disclose these key financial details distressing. Bill Allison, editorial director of the non-profit watchdog group the Sunlight Foundation, said the whole purpose of the disclosure reports is for candidates to provide an honest look at their finances to voters.

"Obviously, if you don't give them the information before the vote, it defeats the whole purpose of disclosure," Allison said.

Melanie Sloan, executive director of the non-partisan group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said she, too, was dismayed -- noting that while in Congress, Gingrich had been called out for failing to include information on his disclosure reports.

"You'd think someone once sanctioned by the House of Representatives ... would be a little more careful with his financial disclosure forms," she said.

The discovery that Romney's vast holdings included an account in Switzerland, a country long notorious for helping the very wealthy hide their assets, came during his release of his tax return earlier this week. Malt, who oversees Romney's blind trusts, acknowledged during a conference call with reporters that he decided to shut down the Swiss account because he worried it could create a headache for Romney's campaign. "It might or might not be consistent with Governor Romney's political views," he said. "The taxes were all fully paid … it just wasn't worth it. And I closed the account."

That suggests, Allison said, that the campaign had a motivation to exclude any evidence of the Swiss account from the candidate's forms. The Romney campaign called the omission an oversight.

Allison noted that there is generally no penalty for a candidate who leaves something off a disclosure report, and then goes back to amend the report if the missing information is discovered.

"Nobody is going to get into trouble for this," he said. "That is the problem with the disclosure system."

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/romney-failed-disclose-swiss-bank-account-income/story?id=15447680#.TyK3a4EXG5K



http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/romney-failed-disclose-swiss-bank-account-income/story?id=15447680#.TyHIu2_XE9U

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Close Ties to Goldman Enrich Romney’s Public and Private Lives
« Reply #62 on: January 29, 2012, 10:27:54 pm »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/close-ties-to-goldman-enrich-romney%E2%80%99s-public-and-private-lives.html

Close Ties to Goldman Enrich Romney’s Public and Private Lives

NICHOLAS CONFESSORE, PETER LATTMAN and KEVIN ROOSE
NY Times
January 28, 2012

When Bain Capital sought to raise money in 1989 for a fast-growing office-supply company named Staples, Mitt Romney, Bain’s founder, called upon a trusted business partner: Goldman Sachs, whose bankers led the company’s initial public offering.

When Mr. Romney became governor of Massachusetts, his blind trust gave Goldman much of his wealth to manage, a fortune now estimated to be as much as $250 million.

And as Mr. Romney mounts his second bid for the presidency, Goldman is coming through again: Its employees have contributed at least $367,000 to his campaign, making the firm Mr. Romney’s largest single source of campaign money through the end of September.

No other company is so closely intertwined with Mr. Romney’s public and private lives except Bain itself. And in recent days, Mr. Romney’s ties to Goldman Sachs have lashed another lightning rod to a campaign already fending off withering attacks on his career as a buyout specialist, thrusting the privileges of the Wall Street elite to the forefront of the Republican nominating battle.

Full article here
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Online chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,874
Romney is not concered about the very poor.
« Reply #63 on: February 01, 2012, 07:17:58 pm »
Mitt Romney sought to downplay a comment he made during an interview on CNN on Wednesday, in which he said he's "not concerned about the very poor[/u]
Romy claims the poor are taken care of, REALY, we beleive you. Soup lines, FEMA camps, stadium accomidations, tent citys, Ya Rom you care allright.
 The industrial revolution put the USA on top, then they sent industrys to foriegsn nation. Made in the USA was once a stamp of approval worldwide, not any more.
..Romney responds to ‘very poor’ criticism: ‘My energy is gonna be devoted to helping middle income people, all right?’.
.By Holly Bailey
Senior Political Reporter
 .PostsEmailRSS .By Holly Bailey | The Ticket – 4 hrs ago..

Offline Constitutionary

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,243
Re: Romney is not concered about the very poor.
« Reply #64 on: February 01, 2012, 07:23:36 pm »
Depression denier, just typical of the neocon base, the Globalists chose their right man.

Even now despite all the evidence many neo-cons still think the unemployed just aren't trying hard enough.

This is why they had Herman Cain picked cuz he spewed the neo-con mantra.

Neocons always get all Directive-4 when it comes to banks, corporations, cops and the military.   >:(

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Re: Romney is not concered about the very poor.
« Reply #65 on: February 01, 2012, 07:24:02 pm »
Mitt Romney sought to downplay a comment he made during an interview on CNN on Wednesday, in which he said he's "not concerned about the very poor
Romy claims the poor are taken care of, REALY, we beleive you. Soup lines, FEMA camps, stadium accomidations, tent citys, Ya Rom you care allright.
 The industrial revolution put the USA on top, then they sent industrys to foriegsn nation. Made in the USA was once a stamp of approval worldwide, not any more.
..Romney responds to ‘very poor’ criticism: ‘My energy is gonna be devoted to helping middle income people, all right?’.

Is this not a perfect illustration of how corporate-whore Republicans continually give corporate-whore Democrats like Obama "left cover"?
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Re: Romney is not concered about the very poor.
« Reply #66 on: February 01, 2012, 09:07:59 pm »
Is this not a perfect illustration of how corporate-whore Republicans continually give corporate-whore Democrats like Obama "left cover"?

I don't think the importance of this point can be overemphasized.

As George Carlin once put it:

"The table is tilted, folks. The game is rigged. And nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. Good, honest, hard-working people -- white color, blue color, it doesn't matter what color shirt you have on -- good, honest, hard-working people continue -- [and] these are people of modest means -- continue to elect these rich c**k-suckers who don't give a f**k about them. They don't give a f**k about you. They don't give a f**k about you. They don't care about you at all, at all, at all! You know? And nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care. That's what the owners count on: the fact that Americans will probably remain willfully ignorant."

Why do so many lower and middle class Americans continue to prove Carlin's point over and over again? Because they have yet to grow up and grow out of the petty mindset described in the following three quotes:

------------------------------

"...I am firmly convinced, as I have already said, that to effect any great social improvement, it is sympathy rather than self-interest, the sense of duty rather than the desire for self-advancement, that must be appealed to. Envy is akin to admiration, and it is the admiration that the rich and powerful excite which secures the perpetuation of aristocracies. Where tenpenny Jack looks with contempt upon ninepenny Joe, the social injustice which makes the masses of the people hewers of wood and drawers of water for a privileged few, has the strongest bulwarks."



"In a society where unjust division of wealth gives the fruits of labor to those who do not labor, the classes who control the organs of public education and opinion—the classes to whom the many are accustomed to look for light and leading, must be loath to challenge the primary wrong, whatever it may be. This is inevitable, from the fact that the class of wealth and leisure, and consequently of culture and influence, must be, not the class which loses by the unjust distribution of wealth, but the class which (at least relatively) gains by it.

"Wealth means power and ‘responsibility,’ while poverty means weakness and disrepute. So in such a society the class that leads and is looked up to, while it may be willing to tolerate vague generalities and impracticable proposals, must frown on any attempt to trace social evils to their real cause, since that is the cause that gives their class superiority. On the other hand, the class that suffers by these evils is, on that account, the ignorant and uninfluential class, the class that, from its own consciousness of inferiority, is prone to accept the teachings and imbibe the prejudices of the one above it; while the men of superior ability that arise within it and elbow their way to the front are constantly received into the ranks of the superior class and interested in its service, for this is the class that has rewards to give. Thus it is that social injustice so long endures and is so difficult to make head against.

"Thus it was that in our Southern States while slavery prevailed, the influence, not only of the slaveholders themselves, but of churches and colleges, the professions and the press, condemned so effectually any questioning of slavery, that men who never owned and never expected to own a slave were ready to persecute and ostracize any one who breathed a word against property in flesh and blood—ready, even, when the time came, to go themselves and be shot in defense of the ‘peculiar institution.’

"Thus it was that even slaves believed abolitionists the worst of humankind, and were ready to join in the sport of tarring and feathering one."

-- Henry George, Protection or Free Trade, pp. 294-6


"You go back hundreds of years to sharecroppers. Economically, many historians wrote that...they were worse off than black slaves here in the U.S. Because the slave was supposedly property, you wanted to keep them alive. Sharecroppers died of malnutrition many times in bad years. And they had to sign a contract to buy their clothes, their sugar, their flour -- everything -- from the company store. You've heard the song, 'I owe my soul to the company store.' When the blacks got supposedly 'free' after the Civil War, many of them just became the lowest rung of the sharecroppers. Most Americans have ancestors who came over here as white slaves. Oh, it was only a seven-year indentured servitude, but you generally never got off of the plantation. But, oh, don't worry, poor whites still enjoyed looking down on blacks. It's all about a snobbery: 'Oh, at least I get to look down on somebody.' And that's why only around 2% of whites in the colonies -- then later in the North and the South -- actually owned slaves, but over 90% (in surveys that were done at the time) of poor whites supported it early on...because they got to look down on somebody. And it wouldn't even matter if the black slave going and picking something up in town for the master was even healthier and had a little bit more fat on their belly than the sharecropper wearing rags, he could still order the black around. And, again, this is all what you see at the country clubs, and what you see in cliques in schools -- humans love tribal hierarchies. And the TSA and the government system and the corporate system gives them all these little power-tripping hierarchies to feed on people and to perch on top of them and control them."


------------------------------
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Online chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,874
Re: Romney is not concered about the very poor.
« Reply #67 on: February 02, 2012, 08:34:00 am »
  Geo. Whats your take on this. First big industry went foriegn and the citizens wonder where the jobs went, 2.. Bailouts for banksters Wall streeters-insiders cashing in who obviously took part in the scheme, industry bailouts that haven't done squat for the working man, the Fed Reserve lackeys who are obviously beating their chest, the Pentagon and their MIC- no ceiling payoffs, Gov expansion- DHS-TSA-etc. I'm sure I missed a beat here, there is much more. NWO- (private) elites only club.
 The poor and struggling, I have a gut feeling the elites see us scoungers as totaly mornic,eaters, nothings, military cannon fodder, lab rats, body parts, zits on an old dogs behind, numbers to be diminished to a controllable number.   
 Only the usefull will survive, the loyal, the wealthy, the corps, and the slaves who will one day be paying the gov 1/2 of their income.
 Creds on mentioning George Carlin, the guy was magic, talent INC & Truth
 
 

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Re: Romney is not concered about the very poor.
« Reply #68 on: February 02, 2012, 10:57:44 am »
Geo. Whats your take on this. First big industry went foriegn and the citizens wonder where the jobs went, 2.. Bailouts for banksters Wall streeters-insiders cashing in who obviously took part in the scheme, industry bailouts that haven't done squat for the working man, the Fed Reserve lackeys who are obviously beating their chest, the Pentagon and their MIC- no ceiling payoffs, Gov expansion- DHS-TSA-etc. I'm sure I missed a beat here, there is much more. NWO- (private) elites only club.
 The poor and struggling, I have a gut feeling the elites see us scoungers as totaly mornic,eaters, nothings, military cannon fodder, lab rats, body parts, zits on an old dogs behind, numbers to be diminished to a controllable number.

My take on that is simply that Warren Buffet was in no way exaggerating when he said:

    “There’s class warfare, all right, but it's my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning.”

Yet have you noticed this never stops smug, privilege-worshipping, label-obsessed reactionaries from mindlessly invoking such mantras as "class envy," "socialism," "communism" and "collectivism" whenever the victims of this war express their rightful indignation?

    "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a Communist."

-- Dom Hélder Câmara


    "There are those in every land who would label as Communist every threat to their privilege. But may I say to you, as I have seen on my travels in all sections of the world, reform is not communism. And the denial of freedom, in whatever name, only strengthens the very communism it claims to oppose."

-- Robert F. Kennedy
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Online chris jones

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17,874
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #69 on: February 02, 2012, 01:28:46 pm »
 I just have to print thee again, creds Geo. (Now they are leaning towards the terrorist lable, homegrown dissidents, hackers, truthers, conspiracy theorists, constitutionalists, etc.. etc...Different words, same Shiiite).

When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor, they call me a Communist."-- Dom Hélder Câmara

[i]"There are those in every land who would label as Communist every threat to their privilege. But may I say to you, as I have seen on my travels in all sections of the world, reform is not communism. And the denial of freedom, in whatever name, only strengthens the very communism it claims to oppose."[/i]
-- Robert F. Kennedy

Jordan

  • Guest
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #70 on: February 24, 2012, 08:47:37 pm »
Romney stages campaign event in virtually empty Detroit stadium



Mitt Romney ”unveiled” his economic plan — again — to about 1,200 members of the Detroit Economic Club this afternoon.

For a speech about taxes, that’s a pretty good turnout. So good, in fact that the campaign had to find a bigger venue.

Their solution? Ford Field Stadium, the 65,000-seat football arena.

According to the Detroit Free Press, the Romney campaign spent quite a bit of time trying to figure out how to make the stadium look full for television cameras:

About 100 news media representatives and 50 or so TV cameras will set up behind the guests, so that it will be clear Romney is speaking to a crowd….They scrapped three earlier plans: one to have Romney stand in the end zone, speaking up to guests seated in the stands; another to have him on the sidelines near midfield, speaking to guests seated in the stadium’s middle sections, and an initial plan to hold the event at the Westin Book Cadillac, which quickly became oversold.

Steve Grigorian, chief operating officer for the Economic Club, said the two earlier Ford Field plans were changed because camera angles would have made it appear there was no one in the stadium but Romney.

Their plan worked — kinda. CSPAN coverage actually did not look too bad — the audience, made up mostly of men in suits and ties, filled the screen whenever the cameras panned back.

But this is the 21st century. Reporters at the event immediately began tweeting photos that showed that Romney was, in fact, speaking to an empty stadium.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/24/romney-stages-campaign-event-in-virtually-empty-detroit-stadium/

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
The Bush family endorses Romney
« Reply #71 on: April 06, 2012, 04:14:30 am »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkLJNN_qioQ (Jeb Bush Endorses Mitt Romney Calls On Party To Unite)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJNI1qw0l04 (Mitt Romney gets George H.W. Bush endorsement)

To any relative newcomers who may be reading this, keep the above in mind as you watch the following:

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISOs_GXEL40
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline jofortruth

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,862
    • The Great Deception
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #72 on: April 06, 2012, 08:16:28 am »
Well of course the Bushes support Romney! Why? They want him to select Jeb Bush (Bushes are Agents of the elite) as his VP so the elite can control Romney should he win! The age old deceit! Look at how many admins have been controlled by the Bush family! It's not a coincidence!

When Bushes don't control the White House, you have Clinton's doing so! Do you see how Bill and Hillary are in powerful positions still, even after leaving the White House? Someone needs to start seeing who these people really work for because it is not the people! THEY ARE GLOBALISTS!

IF ROMNEY CHOOSES BUSH TO BE HIS VP, AFTER BEING SMOOZED BY OLD MAN BUSH TO DO SO, HE WILL SHOW US HE IS CLUELESS, AND JEB WILL BE THE INSIDER FOR THE ELITE TO COVERTLY CONTROL ROMNEY AS PRESIDENT!

THE BUSH AND CLINTON REIGN NEEDS TO END! THEIR ALLEGIANCE IS NOT TO AMERICA, but to the elite agenda of a NWO and globalism!

Don't believe me. Look it up yourself!

The Great Deception - Forum/Library - My Research
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showforum=110

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #73 on: April 15, 2012, 09:12:50 pm »
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Mitt Romney Promises To Continue Obama’s Treason!
« Reply #74 on: May 29, 2012, 10:56:02 am »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/mitt-romney-promises-to-continue-obamas-treason.html

Mitt Romney Promises To Continue Obama’s Treason!

Prisonplanet.com
May 29, 2012

Mitt Romney works for the exact same people as Obama.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19hf_9HN4cU
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
President Romney, Secretary of State Lieberman and War Against Iran
« Reply #75 on: May 29, 2012, 12:03:40 pm »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/president-romney-secretary-of-state-lieberman-and-war-against-iran.html

President Romney, Secretary of State Lieberman and War Against Iran

Kurt Nimmo
Prisonplanet.com
May 29, 2012

On Memorial Day, the presumptive Republican nominee said the world is a dangerous place and the United States must remain the most formidable military in the world.



“The world is not safe,” Romney told veterans in San Diego. He said “social needs” must be sacrificed on the altar of war and never ending military spending. It is the duty of Americans “to commit to preserve America as the strongest military in the world, second to none, with no comparable power anywhere in the world.”

Flanked by senator John McCain, Romney said Iran, Pakistan, China and Russia threaten the hegemony of empire. Romney “believes in American exceptionalism,” McCain said. “He believes the 21st Century will also be an American century.”

Romney has the support of the neocons and their forever war ideology and pro-Israel bias will steer his administration if he beats Obama in November.

In January he said former U.N. ambassador John Bolton’s “wisdom, clarity, and courage are qualities that should typify our foreign policy. I look forward to consulting with him as we campaign to restore America’s standing abroad and ensure that this century is an American Century.” Romney said he “will restore our military, repair relations with our closest allies, and ensure that no adversary – including Iran – ever questions American resolve.”

According to Ari Berman at the Nation, over seventy percent of the neocons who staged the illegal Iraq war have signed up as Mitt’s foreign policy advisors. It is the same old pro-Israel rogue’s gallery, including Elliott Cohen, Robert Kagan (who is behind Romney “American exceptionalism” stance), Eric Edelman (one of Bush’s main neocons at the Pentagon), and Dan Senor.

“Many of these advisors belonged to the PNAC, an influential neoconservative advocacy group founded in the ‘90’s. It has morphed into the Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) launched by Kagan, Edelman and Senor. They advocate for regime change in Iran and a more confrontational stance with Russia. They are opposed to cuts in military spending,” writes Nancy Lindsay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1UE5yUWfxqQ (Colin Powell on Romney's NeoCon Advisors)

In a recent article, Patrick J. Buchanan said Romney’s pick for Secretary of State will either be Bolton or the consummate neocon and Israel-centric warmonger Joe Lieberman.

Neocon fixture Bill Kristol said as much recently. “On Tuesday at Manhattan’s B’nai Jeshurun Synagogue during a debate with J Street founder and President Jeremy Ben-Ami, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol predicted that the next U.S. Secretary of State in a Romney administration would be Senator Joe Lieberman,” Maidhc Ó Cathail wrote on May 19.

Not only is Lieberman “the No. 1 pro-Israel advocate and leader in Congress,” he is also an enemy of the Constitution. “It would be hard to think of anyone who has done more to undermine American freedoms than Joseph Lieberman. Since 9/11, the Independent senator from Connecticut has introduced a raft of legislation in the name of the ‘global war on terror’ which has steadily eroded constitutional rights. If the United States looks increasingly like a police state, Senator Lieberman has to take much of the credit for it,” Cathail writes.

It remains to be seen if Romney will win the game of musical chairs we colloquially call national elections. But it really does not matter. Obama is also committed to attacking Iran.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline Satyagraha

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,147
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #76 on: May 29, 2012, 07:47:37 pm »
Too bad Ron Paul didn't run against Romney.
He ran against a dead guy, John Maynard Keynes, who won by virtue of being carried into the race with Romney.
(Keynesian economics ...)

But most people never heard of Keynes; they needed to know about the "Mitt Romney Deception"

And we had Rand Paul out there talking about how Romney is the guy to 'fix' the economy.

Why Ron Paul didn't attack Romney is a mystery... I'm looking forward to getting more insight into this lack of attack.


"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself."

~ Thomas Paine, A Dissertation on the First Principles of Government, 1795

Offline Dok

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 21,713
    • end times and current events
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #77 on: May 29, 2012, 08:07:08 pm »
The Mormon Plan for America
and
The Rise of Mitt Romney
The Man Who Would Be God
Ed Decker

From the book: My Kingdom Come: The Mormon Quest for Godhood


This is just a peek inside this important chapter



The very ethos of the Mormon faith is built around the anticipated return of Jesus to Independence, Missouri, for his thousand-year millennial reign. It is here that he will assign godhood to the worthy. However, it cannot take place until the U.S. Constitution falters and is saved by the LDS church. The nation will become a Mormon theocracy. Mitt Romney has raised Mormon speculation that this may be the time and that he may be the one to lead the way as both U.S. President and LDS high priest.



Almost 30 Years ago, the late BYU Professor and LDS author Cleon Skousen founded the Freemen Institute [later to be called The National Center for Constitutional Studies]. The name came from the Book of Mormon

And those who were desirous that Pahoran should remain chief judge over the land took upon them the name of freemen; and thus was the division among them, for the freemen had sworn or covenanted to maintain their rights and the privileges of their religion by a free government. Alma 51: 6-7

Skousen joined forces with Jerry Falwell’s Moral Majority on some major political issues late 70s and early 80s and I was prompted to study out both the public and the LDS insider position on government, the constitution. [LDS say it is a divine document from the hand of God] Using that research, I produced a Study called “The Mormon Plan for America”.

When George Romney, Mitt’s father, made his aborted run for President in 1968, there was a lot in internal LDS talk about the last days prophecies that the US constitution would hang by a thread to be saved by the elders of the LDS church. Many felt that the day had finally arrived for the actual “Kingdom of God” to be established.

This pure form of theocratic, prophet led government would prepare the way for the ushering in of the millennium, the time when Jesus would return to earth, sit in his temple in Missouri to reign over the earth, with the center of His government operated as the “Kingdom of God” on earth.

The actual background for all these whispered conversations came from much of the historical documents of the church and the speeches of many of the early church authorities.

REST: http://www.saintsalive.com/resourcelibrary/mormonism/the-mormon-plan-for-america-and-the-rise-of-mitt-romney

worth the read to get the Mormon understanding to what is going on
HOW TO BE SAVED
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/how_to_be_saved.html

Ye Must Be Born Again!
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/ye_must_be_born_again.htm

True Salvation & the TRUE Gospel/Good News!
http://www.contendingfortruth.com/?p=1060

how to avoid censorship ;)

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,953
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.ae911truth.org
Ron Paul Supporters Decry Rand’s Endorsement of Romney
« Reply #78 on: June 08, 2012, 01:46:28 pm »
http://www.prisonplanet.com/ron-paul-supporters-decry-rands-endorsement-of-romney.html

Ron Paul Supporters Decry Rand’s Endorsement of Romney

Majority accuse Kentucky Senator of selling out to Republican establishment

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Friday, June 8, 2012

Editor’s Note: Alex Jones will be covering this issue on today’s show. He will also release a special message for Ron Paul tonight.

Rand Paul’s decision to endorse Mitt Romney as Republican candidate for President is causing a firestorm of outrage amongst Ron Paul supporters, who are accusing the Kentucky Senator of selling out to the political establishment.

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSkt_kvgyeM

During an appearance on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show last night, Rand Paul threw his weight behind the former Massachusetts Governor.

“My first choice had always been my father. I campaigned for him when I was 11-years-old. He’s still my first pick,” Paul told Hannity. “But now that the nominating process is over, tonight I’m happy to announce that I’m going to be supporting Gov. Mitt Romney.”

The Romney campaign quickly shot back with an official press release welcoming the endorsement.

“I am honored to have earned the endorsement of Rand Paul. Senator Paul has been a leading voice in the effort to scale back the size and reach of government and promote liberty. Over the past three and half years, President Obama has made government more and more of a presence in our lives, and Americans can’t afford four more years of the same failed policies. As President, I will reform the federal government and make it smaller, simpler, and smarter. I am grateful for Senator Paul’s support and look forward to working with him to get America back on the right track.”

When asked about signs that Rand Paul was moving closer to Romney after a series of low-key meetings with the former Governor of Massachusetts, Alex Jones pointed out that Paul would be far wiser to wait four years before trying to have an impact on the presidential election.

“I think Rand will destroy himself if he does that,” said Jones, adding, “I would advise Rand Paul to refuse it,” if he is offered the VP slot by the Romney campaign.

The reaction to Rand Paul’s endorsement of Romney on pro-Ron Paul websites has been nothing short of savage. Listed below are just a handful of the thousands of comments attacking Rand for his apparent decision to jump in bed with the Republican establishment.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

http://webofdebt.com
http://schalkenbach.org
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=203330.0

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,308
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: The Mitt Romney Deception
« Reply #79 on: June 08, 2012, 01:56:56 pm »
^^

Don't be surprised if Romney's VP choice is some "evangelical" like Palin, Jindal or that former Minnesota governor(forgot his name) - when Palin was picked in '08, it pretty much wiped out McCain's reputation for not being a Christian(ie-being a member of the Rapture Ready MB back then, I can account for this - when they ate up Palin like she was some fervent evangelical, they pretty much followed McCain as just that).

Yeah, Palin was a member of a denomination(Pentacostals) which is heretical, but nonetheless she was painted as just that(evangelical), and the rest was history.

Ditto could happen this year - Romney's VP could be "evangelical", and the next thing we know the "religious right" clowns like Robertson and Dobson will be swaying their flock as just that toward Romney.