45 votes

The Curious Campaign of Willard “Mitt” Romney

“I believe in an America where millions of Americans believe in an America that’s the America millions of Americans believe in. That’s the America I love.” – Willard Mitt Romney

The entire ascension of Mitt Romney as the “presumptive nominee” for the Republican Party has always been a bit perplexing. There is no logical reason that he should be the standard bearer of the supposed “small government” Party. He has long supported health care mandates, bailouts of the financial industry, government economic “stimulus” spending, and all sorts of government solutions to just about anything. It’s clear that the powers that be in the Republican Party long ago committed to Mitt Romney as their man. This may tell us more about how far the Republican Party has fallen from anything resembling small government principles than it does about Romney.

Now that the media and the Obama campaign are accepting the presumption that Romney will likely be the Republican nominee, the predictable attacks on Romney’s time as CEO of the venture capital company Bain have begun in full force. It’s hilarious to me that with as atrocious of a record that Romney has as Governor, the main focus seems to be on his successes in the private sector. The most baffling part of this is the response, or lack thereof, by the Romney campaign.

Why Won’t Romney Defend Capitalism?

The main premise behind the Obama campaign’s attacks on Bain are that under Romney, Bain Capital companies were involved in outsourcing jobs offshore, and the implication that Romney is somehow cheating on his taxes through offshore investments.

Instead of defending himself and defending capitalism, Romney seems to be ducking away from the issues all together. His main defense of the outsourcing charges is that he effectively left Bain Capital in 1999 in order to run the U.S. Olympics despite the fact that his name was still on filings with the company through 2002. Romney claims that despite this, he “retroactively retired” and was not involved in the day to day operations at the time when much of the outsourcing was taking place. This may or may not be true, but it misses the point.

This would be a perfect opportunity for Romney to defend capitalism and decry the onerous tax policies that often push U.S. companies to outsource work outside the country. Venture capitalist firms serve a very important role in a free economy. They are willing to take on big financial risks when banks are unwilling to do so. The result is troubled companies receiving financing they need to try to rebuild. Often these companies fail anyway. Other times they are able to restructure and turn it around.

Continue Reading




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Hey Folks...

I hate to burst any bubbles or faith in the electoral system but Im gonna have to do it.

In 2008 Mitt Romney and John McCain struck a deal. They both disappeared from the public eye for a few hours. When they emerged Mitt Romney had decided to get out of the race to unify the party.

Im not a fcuking idiot. The deal was that Romney would get out of the race in order to get the nomination this time. Its as simple as that.

The GOP is a private club, remember? Do I have proof? Nope. Do I have common sense? Yup. The media and the party have been pushing Romney since 2008 and wouldnt ya know it... He is the nominee this cycle.

Does that make me a conspiracy theorist?? I hope not.. Im just pointing out the obvious.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Just like Santorum

suddenly dropped out this time and endorsed Rombama. Rombama will not defend capitalism because he is supposed to lose. He is the RINO annointed, the non-choice of a choice the Dempub Government Party has allowed us to choose from: Rombamas Tweedledum to Obamas Tweedledee. Either way they win.
What a transparent con. Anyone with half a brain can see this, it's not even a conspiracy. Rombama has never had much of a campaign or support, he doesn't have to. The Matrix Media has simply broadcast "Reality" for the sheeple to absorb....just as they did with McCain and the Hopey Changer.
It would not surprise me at all to see the convention or presidential election simply cancelled for the "security of the homeland".
"Welcome to the Desert of the Real".

this is the first thing that popped into my head..

after reading your comment:

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

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Carlin

was great.

This is our nominee???? This

This is our nominee????

This is the best the GOP could find?

What's the matter

Don't you love the emperors new clothes?

Ron Paul is the best one.

Ron Paul is the best one.

Mitt Romney's Connection to the Military Industrial Complex

OK, I'll admit it, Mitt Romney has me stumped. If we were talking about something other than politics, I think Mitt would be a decent guy to hang around with. And I really respect capitalism (as long as it is true, free market capitalism) and I would like to do a leveraged buyout myself. I'm cool with Mitt -- at least, the image we see.

And yet, there is something about him that bugs me. Obviously, the guy doesn't seem to have any poltical convictions of any kind, and I could never ever support him for office, not even for dog catcher.

But why the seeming contradiction? Why does a guy that is supposed to be so brilliant seem like nothing more than an empty suit?

I'll be the first to say it: maybe, just maybe, Mitt Romney IS an empty suit. Maybe he is NOT the brillant man we all assume he is (because that is the story we are told).

I did a little research, to find some connections here and there, and I found some interesting things.

Let's take a look down the rabbit hole ...

First off, most people on this website understand how the fascist game works. In a nutshell, YOU pay taxes (at gunpoint, under threat of imprisonment), and the money goes to the government. The government allocates that money into various departments. At the federal level, it sends some of that money to the defense department and other departments, while at the state level it sends some of that money to the department of transportation, among other departments. One of the keys here is that government at all levels spends money on INFRASTRUCTURE. And then it hires private company contractors, some with no-bid contracts, to do the work.

Since political bureaucrats are terrible at oversight, and since government contracts are juicy business deals, the original cost estimates often go over. That's why you pay $8,000 for a hammer. That's why a rail system estimated to cost $100 million ends up costing $400 million. After all, YOU the taxpayer (as well as the politicians) can always be depended upon to cough up more cash (at gunpoint, under threat of imprisonment).

So then ...

Mitt Romney's background is in private equity. That's a big subject these days, private equity. The key word there is PRIVATE, as in not publicly owned, and not under public scrutiny.

Another big private equity firm is The Carlyle Group. The Carlyle Group has its hands DEEP into the Military Industrial Complex. And the Bush family, amongst others, apparently make A LOT of money off the investments.

The Carlyle Group owns Booz Allen Hamilton, a major US intelligence contractor -- they are the guys spying on YOU. I ran across two GREAT videos showing how corrupt the Carlyle Group is with its government players sending money into their investments -- look up "Iron Triangle" and "Spies for Hire" on YouTube.

One of the contracts Booz Allen had was to consult with the IRS. Their genius idea was to divy up who audits different types of returns -- individual, corporations, partnerships, etc. I wonder how many millions of dollars flowed from YOUR pocket to Federal Government -> IRS -> Booz Allen -> Carlyle Group -> George Bush's pocket for that idea that any random person on the street could come up with. THIS is the type of "contracts" that are often paid to these companies.

Ever heard of John Perkins? He wrote "Confessions of an Economic Hitman." He claims he once worked as an economic analyst for a private consulting company and his job was to find ways to justify big infrastructure projects in third world countries so that major US companies could reap windfall profits. In other words, he worked for the Military Industrial Complex. He claims that when third world governments would not play ball, men were sent in to cause civil unrest (Syria today ring any bells???). And if that didn't work, the leader would be assasinated (Saddam Hussein, several others over the years).

Now, Perkins worked for a management consulting company, but that was just a cover. He was really working for this secret cabal. The company he worked for was Chas T. Main. That company was later bought out by Parsons Corporation. Remember that: Parsons Corporation, successor to the company that had economic hitmen on its staff.

By the way, one of the members of the Board of Directors for Parsons also happens to be a current Director of the Federal Reserve Board, San Francisco. Gee, what are the odds?

In 2004, Parsons was awarded a huge contract to build hospitals in Iraq. Surprise, surprise, they went WAAAAY over budget.

Speaking of Iraq, the very first company awarded a contract for Iraq infrastructure in 2003 was Bechtel Corporation. George Schultz was president and director of Bechtel at one time, and he later became Secretary of State in the Reagan administration. So, Bechtel has "friends in high places."

Now, remember that crazy infrastructure project in Boston several years ago? It was called the "Big Dig." It was a boondoggle, costing the taxpayers billions in cost overruns. Guess who the contractor was for that? It was a joint venture between Bechtel and Parsons.

And in 2003, there was a terrible accident during construction. Safety issues, cost overruns ... a nightmare for the Bechtel/Parsons boys!!!

Sure would be nice to have some government higher-ups sweep things under the rug, pretend to do a "serious investigation" and then pronounce that everything is just fine. Hmm ... WHO was governor of Massachussetts in 2003?

Mitt Romney.

But surely, that's just a coincidence. Mitt Romney worked for/owned Bain Capital. Is he REALLY connected to the Military Industrial Complex?

Well, do you like doughnuts? Ever eat Dunkin' Doughnuts? Pretty tasty, huh? Yeah, that's what the owners of Dunkin' Brands, Inc. think, too. And who owns Dunkin' Brands? Some private equity companies. Can you guess who?

Bain Capital, Thomas Lee Partners, and The Carlyle Group.

And Bain and Thomas Lee have done A TON of deals together. The biggest one I would think is their buyout of Clear Channel Communications, which owns Premier Radio Networks, which syndcates (owns) the Rush Limbaugh Show, the Sean Hannity Show, the Mark Levin Show, Coast-to-Coast (it's never been the same since Art Bell, huh ... but not because of Art), and several other talk radio shows. And all these talk show hosts "just happen" to think Mitt Romney is brilliant and Ron Paul is ... errr ... Ron who?

The neoconservatives took over the Republican Party (doesn't mean the libertarians can't take control from them, but they are currently in control of the party). The neocons are NOT conservative. They are socialists, with a strong bend towards fascist (privately owned BIG business under government control -- and bailouts).

The neocons recruited Mitt Romney through private equity to control talk radio. And the circles Mitt runs in, if he's not a card carrying member himself, are certainly some of the movers in the Military Industrial Complex.

One of Mitt's key advisors (forget his name) in his campaign, and someone thought to become Chief of Staff if Mitt wins, is a former governor of Utah -- and a Democrat.

Mitt himself has always acted much like a Democrat. But he's a successful businessman, so maybe his "role" is to be a Republican.

And do we know who might have helped his cause to success somewhere along the line? After all, we don't know WHO provides the capital for those private equity deals, now do we, because it's PRIVATE -- *cough* Carlyle *cough* JP Morgan *cough* Goldman Sachs.

All I can say is, for a guy who has had a successful career as a businessman in one of the most competitive business environments on the planet (private equity), and who ran an Olympic event, and who was governor, Mitt Romney doesn't seem to have any real opinions on any particular damn thing. Seems more like an empty suit.

And I wonder ... does he owe a big part of his success to making the "right" connections along the way, getting the funding necessary to make a ton of money, and then returning the favor when necessary -- Big Dig, Clear Channel, the 2012 election ???

I dunno ... but he sure seems like he's got certain ... connections.

And ... something else that's kinda curious --

It seems that there are only about 3 "big" management consulting companies out there, all in Boston. There's Bain & Company, Boston Consulting Group, and McKinsey & Company.

These seem to be training grounds for certain "types."

McKinsey's past employees include Jeffrey Sklling, former CEO of Enron (yeah, that company that committed fraud and went BK), Peter Wuffli, former CEO of UBS (the Swiss company that was giving bogus advice to Americans on saving taxes -- and then ratted them out), Louis Gerstner, former CEO of Carlyle Group (need I say more?), and Chelsea Clinton (WTF???).

Boston Consulting Group once had Bill Bain on board, who later formed Bain & Company, the other big consulting company. Romney was hired on at Bain & Company (consulting company) and later created Bain Capital (private equity firm) with Bill Bain's help.

So, only 3 management companies out there that are considered "top tier?" Seems odd, too.

More conflict of interest ... or enrichment ... for Romney

When Romney was gov. of Mass., the state had contracts with companies that were owned by Bain Capital, which Romney made money from:

https://fredericacade.wordpress.com/2012/07/03/a-conflict-of...

Is Sankaty a Clue ???

Something else I ran across is Sankaty.

There is "Sankaty Advisors, LLC," which is part of Bain Capital, LLC. But there is also "Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors, Ltd.," a Bermuda entity.

Now, consider that Mitt Romney, both for Mass. governor and for presidential candidate, had to fill out financial disclosure forms. In both cases, he omitted his ownership of Sankaty (Bermuda). The story is that there was some sort of loophole so that he didn't have to report it and that his ownership only came out because of his release of his tax returns.

CBS Article:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57466462/romneys-undiscl...

Now, what the controlled media is talking about is the fact that Sankaty is a Bermuda fund, which gives it tax advantgages for foreigners (big deal). But ...

Is it possible that Sankaty, being in the credit game, was actually involved in buying up some of those bad credit assets, which was "helpful" in the overall government bailout schemes? Could that be why Mitt seems smitten with goverment bailouts?

Here's an article that addresses that possibility:

http://www.pauldrockton.com/Sankaty.html

The author of the article makes the claim that the reason Romney does not want to disclose more tax returns is that it would show that Romney made a fortune from the credit collapse, and that further, maybe Romney was one of the players that helped cause the collapse to happen.

The controlled media is ONLY talking about how Sankaty is (a) offshore and (b) "hints" at greater wealth for Romney (gee, ya think?). But they are IGNORING the possibility that Romney's Sankaty could have been involved in the credit collapse.

One other thing to keep in mind: these guys use entity names that are very similar, and sometimes identical to, other entities. There is "Bain Capital, LLC" and there is "Bain Capital, Inc." Both are entities formed in Delaware, but they are two completely different entites. The corporation (inc.) is owned by Mitt Romney. There is "Sankaty Advisors, LLC" and there is "Sankaty High Yeild Asset Investors, LP" and there is "Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors, Ltd." The first two are Bain entites, an LLC and a limited partnership, both formed in Delaware. The third is a limited partnership or possibly other entity formed in Bermuda, owned at least in part by Mitt Romney.

Now, why would they use near-identical entity names? Sure makes it a lot tougher to track which entity is doing what. And when someone refers to "Bain" or "Sankaty," which specific entity are they talking about? Could be a problem -- or could be a primary reason for doing it in the first place.

I also ran across several references to Sankaty Advisors, LLC having various investment connections with D.E. Shaw & Company, an asset management company involved in credit markets. D.E. Shaw recently had on it's staff Lawrence Summers (who, according to Wiki "drew a large salary"). Summers was Secretary of Treasury in Clinton's Administration, where he was a key player in getting the law changed regarding banks and financial derivatives markets, which allowed the big leverage that eventually caused a problem (which would have been fine, IMO, if it weren't for the government bailouts).

It's a relatively small group of people (starting with the Federal Reserve) who caused the problem, and a smaller group of people who used the taxpayers to not only solve "their" problem but also to make a few insiders rich.

Was Mitt Romney one of those people?

Awesome post, TommyPaine!

Awesome post, TommyPaine!

It was my brother mentioning to me that I should look into The Carlyle Group and the Bush family connections (ie Prescott Bush) years ago that kicked me down the rabbit hole. This should be it's own post, BTW.

Thank you for the time and effort to post this.

If my need to be RIGHT is greater than my desire for TRUTH, then I will not recognize it when it arrives ~ Libertybelle

Thanks -- more info

Thanks. I haven't found any smoking gun that Romney is one of the bad guys, but he does travel within their circles. OTOH, it is kinda hard not to if you're in that business (but ususally, it is only the key players who make their way to the top).

If you or anybody else wants to take a DEEP dive down the rabbit hole, here are some great videos:

Short interview with John Perkins, just a few minutes where he outlines the overall theme:
http://www.democracynow.org/2004/11/9/confessions_of_an_econ...

Long interview with John Perkins, where he goes into more detail:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqIHKWd9rSc&feature=related

Best video I've seen about Carlyle Group, including interview with Cynthia McKinney where she tells what really happened to get her out of Congress:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZeaJ1QoKlg&feature=related

Great interview about how government funnels tax money to the "corporatocracy:"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfkQ70sT_vM&feature=related

Thank you very much for the

Thank you very much for the extra effort! I will review these.

If my need to be RIGHT is greater than my desire for TRUTH, then I will not recognize it when it arrives ~ Libertybelle

Great piece to wake people

Great piece to wake people up.

Of course it's obvious what he's doing. His job is to make people believe they have a choice. They both represent big government. But they also need to appear to be fighting, so we all think they are so different.

The best example was Romney attacking Rick Perry for calling the social security a Fraud, and Rick Perry attacking Romney for calling it a Ponzi Scheme. One wanted to overhaul it, while one wanted to keep the good but correct the bad. They both attacked each other for scaring people. And neither one talked about any actual corrections.

Imagine if Rick Perry in defending himself said "Actually, we're saying the same thing". Everyone would in one moment realize they are the same!

Same thing with Romney v Obama. They can't knock down arguments, or they're just making more work for the other guy. So both let these idiotic arguments play out in the media, and the homes of the sleeping, and they bide time until the elections when the predetermined winner wins.

What it means...

It is Greenspan-speak. You are impressed with the flow of words and don't have a clue what it means and never will. Because it is total gibberish.

It's his turn. No qualifications necessary.

McCain 2008
Romney 2012
Santurum (?) 2016...if we are still a country.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

Quote Explanation?

Can someone please explain that quote to me? Honestly, it's like a balloon releasing nothing but air; I just don't understand.

It sounds

like something my 12 year old wrote.

“I believe in an America where millions of Americans believe in an America that’s the America millions of Americans believe in. That’s the America I love.” – Willard Mitt Romney

It sounds like

obammy's teleprompter wrote it.

Keepin' it real.

It sounds like Sponge Bob:

"I smell a smell, a smelly smell that smells smelly".

His specialty (The wonderful

His specialty (The wonderful willard of Massachusetts) is deception.

I get the feeling Romney is

Not so sure he wants the job. Maybe 4 years ago when they promised him the nomination it seemed like a good idea at the time. Now that the economy has not recovered and a second down turn is likely, I don't think he is so confident.

reedr3v's picture

Power lust is not rational. One would think

Obama would run screaming from another term considering the horrific shape of all he's touched. But no.

He's advancing the plan

The plan is to destroy the economy, the country. The Obammunist is a rousing success. He is fulfilling his purpose. An illegal alien UN globalist Marxist tasked with advancing the destruction of American sovereignty. I fully expect him to outright cede federal property to the UN, the "Wilderness areas" was a step toward it.
Marxists do not share the values of most people, some do not even have much concern for their own kids. Look at Obamas mother leaving him alone with his probable real father, the pornographer Marxist Marshall. Or the Marxist Israelis who abandoned their kids to communes. It's anti-human.

Right, if he was rational

I would guess once in the presidential bubble, surrounded with admirers, yes men advisers, and the fawning MSM, that power must be highly addictive. The only president that I can remember who voluntarily did not run for reelection was LBJ.