Mittens Steps Onto the World State — and Into a Big Pile of Doo Doo

Posted on by

Once again, Mitt’s statesmanship skills are equal to Dubya’s.

Mitt Romney’s carefully choreographed trip to London caused a diplomatic stir when he called the British Olympic preparations “disconcerting” and questioned whether Londoners would turn out to support the Games.

“The stories about the private security firm not having enough people, the supposed strike of the immigration and customs officials, that obviously is not something which is encouraging,” Mr. Romney said in an interview with NBC on Wednesday.

That prompted a tart rejoinder from the British prime minister, David Cameron. “We are holding an Olympic Games in one of the busiest, most active, bustling cities anywhere in the world. Of course it’s easier if you hold an Olympic Games in the middle of nowhere,” an allusion to Salt Lake City, which hosted Games that Mr. Romney oversaw.

Oh, snap, Mr. Prime Minister. That may be about the snarkiest thing a British Prime Minister has said about a prominent American since the War of 1812. I thought all you Anglo-Saxons could get along? Mittens should take comportment lessons from the horse.

To add insult to injury, the Financial Times has dredged up something Mittens wrote about Britain awhile back —

In his book, No Apology, he writes:

England [sic] is just a small island. Its roads and houses are small. With few exceptions, it doesn’t make things that people in the rest of the world want to buy. And if it hadn’t been separated from the continent by water, it almost certainly would have been lost to Hitler’s ambitions. Yet only two lifetimes ago, Britain ruled the largest and wealthiest empire in the history of humankind. Britain controlled a quarter of the earth’s land and a quarter of the earth’s population.

Its roads and houses are small? The trees probably aren’t the right height either.

First, if Mittens isn’t booed at least once when he shows up in the stands to watch the horse dances, I’ll be very disappointed. Second — I’ve been to Britain, and I didn’t notice the houses were small. They seemed like regular house-size houses to me. But then, I haven’t spent my life in one McMansion after another. I wonder if Mitt really has seen much of his own country, while being driven to the country club in a limousine.

Update: Must see —Mitt’s British Blunders: How It Played In The UK Press. He also addressed Labour leader Ed Miliband as “Mr. Leader.” And see the Guardian’s live blog of Romney’s gaffes. Hysterical.

Senate Dems Rock

Posted on by

Last week I wrote that Senate Dems called Mitch McConnell’s bluff over the Bush tax cuts. They were prepared to let all the Bush tax cuts expire rather than extend the tax cuts for the rich. Harry Reid has been saying that he had the votes to pass an extension of the Bush tax cuts up to an income of $250,000, and no higher.

This week McConnell counter-bluffed. This morning Senate Republicans dropped a threatened filibuster and allowed the Dem plan to come to the floor for a simple majority vote. Wow I almost forgot the Senate could do that. McConnell probably figured Reid would come up short

Anyway — this afternoon, the bill passed, 51-48. A Republican bill to extend all the tax cuts was defeated, 45-54.

Will wonders never cease? Of course this isn’t going to fly in the House, but it puts Republicans in a very precarious place.

Romney on Foreign Policy: Aspiring to Be Another Dubya

Posted on by

I’ve been reading more about Romney’s pathetic stabs at sounding statemanlike on foreign policy. At The American Conservative, Daniel Larison takes Romney apart in two posts, Romney’s VFW Speech and Romney and the Cult of Resolve. Both are well worth reading.

Romney’s VFW speech is a chilling thing. Except for not mentioning September 11, it sounds like it was cribbed from old Dubya talking points. Here is a representative snip:

Like a watchman in the night, we must remain at our post – and keep guard of the freedom that defines and ennobles us, and our friends. In an American Century, we have the strongest economy and the strongest military in the world. In an American Century, we secure peace through our strength. And if by absolute necessity we must employ it, we must wield our strength with resolve. In an American Century, we lead the free world and the free world leads the entire world.

If we do not have the strength or vision to lead, then other powers will take our place, pulling history in a very different direction. A just and peaceful world depends on a strong and confident America. I pledge to you that if I become commander-in-chief, the United States of America will fulfill its duty, and its destiny.

The whole speech is full of that kind of crap which, as Larison says, sounds fine as long as you don’t think about what it really means.

President Obama’s speech was full of specifics about what he has done for veterans and what he still intends to do. Romney’s speech amounted to a tribal aggression display — verbal spear waving and chest-thumping, delivered (quoting Larison) “in that strained, almost incredulous-sounding tone he uses when he wants to convey emotion.”

As Charles Pierce said,

Well, he’ll “use every means necessary to protect us and the region” from Iran, because that’s what all the neocon retreads who are teaching him which end of Persia is up are telling him to say. (New wars!) He also talked tough about Russia, China, and Venezuela. He criticized the president for withdrawing the missile shield from Poland and Czechoslovakia, leaving those two nations naked before the Red Army and the aggressive territorial ambitions of Soviet Premier Malenkov. The rest of the speech was an aria of elaborate dick-waving because, frankly, on these difficult issues, that’s all Romney has. His experience in foreign policy is decidedly limited to finding new places to hide his fortune.

The New York Times also points out that Romney’s speech offered nothing persuasive or even coherent. Parse all you like; any indication of what Romney might actually do regarding foreign policy is not forthcoming. You’d probably get better information about what Romney actually thinks from a ouija board.

Romney Campaign to Britain: Us White Guys Should Stick Together

Posted on by

From the British Telegraph, which pretty regularly publishes pro-rightie views:

As the Republican presidential challenger accused Barack Obama of appeasing America’s enemies in his first foreign policy speech of the US general election campaign, advisers told The Daily Telegraph that he would abandon Mr Obama’s “Left-wing” coolness towards London.

In remarks that may prompt accusations of racial insensitivity, one suggested that Mr Romney was better placed to understand the depth of ties between the two countries than Mr Obama, whose father was from Africa.

“We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special,” the adviser said of Mr Romney, adding: “The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have”.

May prompt accusations of racial insensitivity? And as a Celtic-American, I would add that some of us don’t identify as “Anglo-Saxons.”

Elsewhere, Romney watchers are calling his foreign policy ideas brilliant — if it were still 1956. See Mitt Romney still fighting cold war and Mitt Romney’s Overseas Trip Smacks of Cold War Nostalgia.

Mitt: Delusional or Lying?

Posted on by

Late last week Mittens blabbed that he had met privately in San Francisco with the Australian foreign minister, Bob Carr. And in this private meeting, Carr had told him the rest of the world sees America in decline. When I read this, I remember thinking this is the last time a foreign leader would tell Mittens anything in confidence. But it turns out Carr probably didn’t say anything of the sort. The Sydney Morning Herald reports:

So imagine Senator Carr’s surprise when he gets off the plane tomorrow to find out that Governor Romney has been using the meeting as political ammunition against his presidential rival.

According to the Republican presidential hopeful, Senator Carr also touched on America’s economic vulnerabilities during their chat.

“I met today with the Foreign Minister of Australia. He said something, and I said ‘Can I quote you?’ and he said yes. He said, ‘America is just one budget deal away from ending all talk of America being in decline,”’ Governor Romney told attendees at a fundraiser today.

”And this idea of America in decline, it was interesting [Carr] said that, he led the talk of America being in decline. See that’s not talk we hear about here as much as they’re hearing there. And if they’re thinking about investing in America, entrepreneurs putting their future in America, if they think America’s in decline they’re not gonna do it.”

The repeated comments can be seen as a not-so veiled attack on US President Barack Obama and his handling of the economy.

Carr says he said no such thing. Of course, Carr’s denials could be disingenuous. Maybe he said what Romney says he said, but didn’t expect the remarks to become public and is now walking the comment back to smooth over relations with this U.S. But now people who know something about Australian politics and Mr. Carr are saying there is no way Carr said what Mittens says he said.

In Australia, there is no political party as extreme as the modern GOP and Carr is a member of the Labor Party, which is the more left wing of our two party system and well to the left of the Democratic Party. He could never say so, but Bob Carr will be hoping for an Obama victory in November. Third, Carr is a seasoned and wily politician, who rarely uses words loosely. He was the longest serving Premier of NSW, our most populous state. He would have been very careful about what he said to Romney.

Like most Australians, he probably does think that America is in decline (not irreversibly, but the evidence is pretty clear), but there is no way he would say that to a conservative politician on US soil. His account of what he said to Romney is likely to be accurate. Finally, Carr knows more about US politics than most American politicians. I’m serious. He is a charter member of the Charles A Arthur Society. Carr did not blithely stumble into US domestic politics in the way Romney suggested.

Romney picked the wrong guy to use as a political pawn.

Except that Romney will no doubt work the “America is in decline” story into his stump speech, and will repeat it ad nauseum until the convention, because that’s the kind of guy he is — a serial liar.

But I’m going to toss out one other possibility, which is that Mitt is correctly describing what he heard Bob Carr say. That’s not to say Bob Carr said what Mittens said he said; it’s that Mittens hears what he wants to hear. Incoming data are scrambled to fit Mitt’s views as soon as they enter his brain.

So it’s entirely possible that Mittens took Bob Carr’s words and imposed his own opinions onto them, his primary opinion being that he, the Glorious Mittens, is all-wise and uniquely qualified to lead America out of whatever darkness he sees it in.

This leads us into the metaphysical question of whether Mittens is actually lying if he believes what he says to be true. Whatever. Either way, the thought of Mittens in the White House ought to scare the stuffing out of all of us.

Power Corrupts

Posted on by

Ouch, Penn State. They’d already pulled down Joe Paterno’s statue, which surprised me. Now I see the NCAA has hit them with a real penalty.

The NCAA has hit Penn State with a $60 million sanction, a four-year football postseason ban and a vacation of all wins dating to 1998, the organization said Monday morning.

The career record of Joe Paterno will reflect these vacated records, the NCAA said.

Penn State must also reduce 10 initial and 20 total scholarships each year for a four-year period. …

…The Penn State athletic program will also be put on five-year probation and must work with an athletic-integrity monitor of NCAA’s chosing.

More from the power corrupts, etc., department — Business Week has an eye-opening article on How the Mormons Make Money. A snip:

It’s perhaps unsurprising that Mormonism, an indigenous American religion, would also adopt the country’s secular faith in money. What is remarkable is how varied the church’s business interests are and that so little is known about its financial interests. Although a former Mormon bishop is about to receive the Republican Party’s presidential nomination, and despite a recent public-relations campaign aimed at combating the perception that it is “secretive,” the LDS Church remains tight-lipped about its holdings. It offers little financial transparency even to its members, who are required to tithe 10 percent of their income to gain access to Mormon temples. …

… Mormons make up only 1.4 percent of the U.S. population, but the church’s holdings are vast. First among its for-profit enterprises is DMC, which reaps estimated annual revenue of $1.2 billion from six subsidiaries, according to the business information and analysis firm Hoover’s Company Records (DNB). Those subsidiaries run a newspaper, 11 radio stations, a TV station, a publishing and distribution company, a digital media company, a hospitality business, and an insurance business with assets worth $3.3 billion.

Hmm, vast wealth, little transparency or accountability, mixed up with religion. Is there anyone here who doesn’t think this will blow up into a mega-scandal someday?

Awhile back I read a book about the Mormons called Under the Banner of Heaven: A Story of Violent Faith by Jon Krakauer. It is gripping, and disturbing. All manner of whackjob religions and spiritualisms emerged in the late 19th century, for some reason, and Mormonism is but one example. But it’s the most successful one, possibly because it has evolved to become more acceptable to mainstream culture.

I’m not saying the Mormons are a menace to society, but even for a religion it’s a tad out of whack. The faithful are taught to be obedient and to keep the church’s secrets from outsiders, even if they have to lie. Mormonism rather than chicanery may be at the root of Mittens’s reluctance to reveal his tax returns. And that’s a recipe for internal corruption.

Guns Are Making Us Less Free

Posted on by

So far, the aftermath of the Aurora tragedy has followed the usual trajectory. One difference is that I haven’t heard anyone suggest that if we had just posted the Ten Commandments in the movie theater, this tragedy would never have happened. Although maybe someone said that and I missed it.

I hear people carping about the TSA security procedures at airports. Well, just wait. In New York City it’s common to have to walk through a metal detector to enter many office buildings. Lots of schools have metal detectors now, I understand, as well as courthouses and other public buildings. If we keep going down this road, the day may come when people have to empty their pockets and go through a detector just to enter a mall or a movie theater.

The theory on the Right is that lots of guns in the hands of citizens protect our freedoms. Seems to me it’s turning us into a kind of bizarro police state, where our freedom to go where we want to go may be restricted for the sake of security. That’s freedom?

I take the President didn’t say a word about guns in his remarks on the shooting yesterday. The political reality is that guns have become the real third rail of politics. Whatever his personal beliefs are on gun control, President Obama doesn’t dare even mention guns, especially with an election looming. That’s freedom?

I’ve written before that the NRA is going around pushing whackjob state gun laws that are contrary to the will of the people in that state. But the state legislators don’t dare say no to the NRA. That’s freedom?

The fact is, there is a strong correlation between high rates of gun ownership and high rates of gun fatalities in the U.S. And “stand your ground” laws have led to an increase in homicides. That’s freedom?

In some parts of the country, such as New York City, most people don’t think it’s a good idea to let anyone carry a concealed weapon anywhere he wants. We don’t need shoot-outs on crowded subway cars, thanks much. But if the NRA had its way, concealed carry would be lawful in New York, and the people of New York wouldn’t have anything to say about it. And you might as well retire the metal detectors, because the NRA will see to it that people can lawfully carry concealed weapons anywhere they want. Our life or death will depend on the mental health of the people around us.

That’s freedom?

The fact is, more guns in circulation and fewer restrictions on guns purchases and carrying puts the public at a higher risk of gun violence, which little by little is causing us to rely on security measures that restrict our freedom of movement. Thanks loads, NRA.

Here’s a nice background article on the history of guns in America. Did you know that in the 19th century it was common for guns to be outlawed within city limits, and no one complained about their rights being violated?

Aliens

Posted on by

This is hysterical — you remember the ad with Mittens badly singing “America the Beautiful”? The Romney campaign retorted with one of the President singing Al Green’s “Let’s Stay Together.” Gary Silverman writes in the Financial Times that the Romney ad seemed an odd choice, since the President actually sings fairly well. A supporter of Romney explained:

In an appearance on CNN with her husband, Mrs Welch suggested that Mr Obama’s personal style and choice of musical material define him as a member of a “different America”. I would imagine this is why Mr Romney’s campaign included the snippet of Mr Obama singing “Let’s Stay Together” at the Apollo Theater in Harlem. They hoped it would convey his otherness.

“It’s the difference between the songs that they’re singing,” Mrs Welch said. “Mitt Romney didn’t exactly do a beautiful job on that song, but think about what he’s singing, OK? I mean it’s that patriotic song and he goes all the way through it. Then you’ve got the very cool Barack Obama singing Al Green. That is the two different Americas. Isn’t it?”

Silverman thinks the Romney crew are showing their age. I’m not sure age is the issue here. Let’s see — what’s so alien about Al Green?

Al Green

or President Obama?

Now, what would make somebody think these two are “alien”?

Mittens’s Bane

Posted on by

An investigative piece in the Boston GLobe by Beth Healy and Michael Kranish pretty much shreds the claim that Mittens had nothing to do with Bain Capital after 1999.

Interviews with a half-dozen of Romney’s former partners and associates, as well as public records, show that he was not merely an absentee owner during this period. He signed dozens of company documents, including filings with regulators on a vast array of Bain’s investment entities. And he drove the complex negotiations over his own large severance package, a deal that was critical to the firm’s future without him, according to his former associates.

Indeed, by remaining CEO and sole shareholder, Romney held on to his leverage in the talks that resulted in his generous 10-year retirement package, according to former associates.

“The elephant in the room was not whether Mitt was involved in investment decisions but Mitt’s retention of control of the firm and therefore his ability to extract a huge economic benefit by delaying his giving up of that control,” said one former associate, who, like some other Romney associates, spoke only on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak for the company.

Yes, this article documents that Mittens kept the CEO title not because he thought he might come back after the Olympics, but so he could squeeze the biggest possible severance package out of the company.

Other must-reads — Ryan Grim and Zach Carter, “Mitt Romney Avoided Major Tax Hit By Shifting Stock Of Offshoring Firm”

Paul Krugman, “Pathos of the Plutocrat“