Saturday, July 28, 2012

And Mitt Burnt the London Bridge*!

That there are some Americans that still believe that Mitt Romney could ever be a good representative of our people, that he could be the President of the United States is a mystery to me. How can they even consider electing another brainless man to represent us? Americans have always thought of being the axle of the world, the center in which the rest of the world depends on and revolves around. But in an era where we are more connected than ever, this axle is slowly eroding and how our leaders interact with each other is detrimental to the prosperity of their countries and the world. From that interaction we can either create friends or foes, and we all know we have enough enemies as it is, there is no reason or excuse to antagonize the few friends we have.
As a diplomat Mitt Romney is a failure, a huge failure and he selected the United Kingdom to display his ignorance. The Brits are known for their outspokenness, their wit and sarcasm and can shed into pieces those that dare to cross them… and that is exactly what Mitt did! On his first trip overseas as a serious contender for the Presidency of the United States, he couldn’t contain his ever-lasting vanity, the opportunity to put others down in order for him to shine since he has no glow of his own. How stupid can you be to put in question the capabilities of our most trusted ally to put together the 2012 Olympics? How stupid can you be that in order to shower yourself with self-praise you can’t keep your mouth shut? I thought that Bush was an international embarrassment, Mitt is far worst. And who can forget Tina Fey's  “I see Russia from my house” impersonating the "brilliance" of Sarah Palin? I thought she was an international laughing stock and that no one could ever outdone her… I must admit I was wrong!
Mitt Romney had time to prepare for this trip. He had time to be coached by his advisors, he had time to learn the names of the leaders of every country he is to visit, at least he should have learned the names of those leaders he was to meet with. But no, narcissist Mitt is too “important” in his own little head to bother with learning their names, English names that would have been easier for him to remember. How can we expect him to learn the names of leaders in countries where the names are so difficult to pronounce? During a press conference, after meeting with Ed Millband, the leader of the Labour Party and of the Opposition, Mitt Romney couldn't remember his name and resorted to call him "Mr. Leader."  What a fiasco!

What amazes me the most is, that it took the Brits barely two days to recognize the scum Mitt Romney is. To denounce what a moron Mitt Romney truly is. It took them less than two days!!! Why, oh why it’s so difficult for his supporters this side of the pond to recognize he is an utterly failure?
I’ve come to the conclusion that those supporters have an IQ lower than George W. Bush and Sarah Palin hence, they think these two are brilliant and of course white, a big plus in their racist minds. Imagine, they cheered and followed a woman that wanted Alaska to secede from the Union (there is a sure proof of her love for America!) and a man that systematically has been destroying Americans by outsourcing their jobs… then these followers have the audacity to call themselves “patriots” but what remains to be known is that they are patriots but, of what country?

*The phase "burnt the London Bridge" is not referring to the actual London Bridge, but that Mitt Romney burnt his bridges, in this case London.... for those of you that don't get it.

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

No Help Needed

Mitt Romney is complaining because President Obama said that no successful person reached success all on their own. The GOP machine is quickly criticizing and shredding into tiny pieces our President for saying the truth. There is no business that succeeds all on its own. Someone built the roads for people to get there, someone installed the cabling necessary for phones to work, for electricity to reach the building. Someone built the building, desk, chair, paper, etc. And what is more important, someone was interested in whatever they were offering. Without us, the regular folks, no business would go very far, no matter how bright the businessman is or how good the product or service is; if there are no consumers, the business will go bankrupt. Romney knows this all too well; after all bankrupting companies and getting government help is what created most of his wealth.
Mitt Romney said in his 2002 Olympics inaugural speech something very similar to that said by President Obama and for which he is harshly being criticized for.   However, Romney's comment wasn’t aimed at businessmen. No, his comments were directed at the competing youth. He was clear to remind them that they didn’t get there on their own, that if they got to where they were was thanks to the help from others.  I guess that it is perfectly alright to say to a group of young athletes that their lifelong sacrifice as a child to reach the pinnacle of their sport is not a merit that they can claim as their own, but that they must be share the credit with others. As usual, it is a sin to suggest that a businessman needed help along the way to be successful. How dare President Obama even make such a suggestion?!  Doesn't President Obama know that "a businessmen should not be touched, not even with a rose petal?"

Romney wants us to believe that a businessman never asked for help. We are to believe that businessmen to make their dreams come true, built with their bare hands the buildings and did everything – absolutely everything – by themselves; they never needed a loan, a line of credit, secretaries, sales people.... consumers.
Without consumers, without us, businesses could be selling the cheapest and purest diamonds in the world that if no one buys them, they will just be sitting on a pile of polished coal!

President Obama - Transcript.

...But you know what? I’m not going to see us gut the investments that grow our economy to give tax breaks to me or Mr. Romney or folks who don’t need them. So I am going to reduce the deficit in a balanced way, we’ve already made a trillion dollars worth of cuts, we can make another trillion or two and what we then do is ask for the wealthy to pay a little bit more. And by the way, we’ve tried that before, a guy named Bill Clinton did it, we created twenty-three million new jobs, turned a deficit into a surplus and rich people did just fine.

We created a lot of millionaires; you know there are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with us ‘cause they want to give something back. They know they didn’t… If you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, “Well it must be because I was just so smart” There are a lot of smart people out there! “It must be because I worked harder than everybody else.” Let me tell you something, there’s a bunch of hard working people out there. If you were successful somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Someone invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, that… you didn’t build that! Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so then all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is that when we succeed, we succeed because of the individual initiative but also because we do things together. There are some things, like fighting fires; we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their fire service, that’d be a hard way to organize fighting fires. So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what? There are some things we do better together. That’s how we founded the GI Bill, that’s how we created the middle class, that’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge, the Hoover Dam, that’s how we invented the Internet, that’s how we sent a man to the moon. We raise or fall together as one nation and as one people and that’s the reason I’m running for President, because I still believe in that idea: You are not on your own; we’re on this together!

Mitt Romney - Transcript

Is this a great show or what?! And how about that volunteer cast, uh?
This show it’s being watched all over the world. Young Yem Kim is eleven years old; he’s watching us tonight from his home in Seoul, Korea. It’s his dream to skate in the Olympics. In Piamonte, Italy, a fourteen-year-old girl named Nicole Ibasso is also watching, her dream is to compete in the giant slab in the games of 2006. Children around the world are dreaming. Dreaming of daring performances, cheering friends and proud parents.

Tonight we cheer the Olympians who only yesterday were children themselves, as we watch them over the next sixteen days, they affirm that our aspirations and those of our children and grandchildren can become reality. We salute you Olympians, both because you dreamed and because you paid the price to make your dreams real. You guys pushed yourselves, drove yourselves, sacrificed, trained and competed time and again, winning and loosing. You Olympians know that you didn’t get here solely on your own power. For most of you, loving parents, sisters and brothers, encouraged your hopes; coaches guided, communities built venues and organized competitions. All Olympians stand on the shoulders of those who lifted them. We’ve already cheered the Olympians; lets also cheer the parents, coaches and communities.

After September, more than ever before our generation longs for a world where the dreams of all the children may come true, where aspirations can be nourished and homes with caring families and of nations which embrace peace and the rights of human kind. In such a world, the greatness of achievements would be measured by the greatness of dreams and by the fire and passion in the hearts of the dreamers. Olympians, the world watches you not just to see spectacular athletic performance, but also to be inspired by the spirit and fire which drives you. You skate and ski and our hearts quicken with your dream. We find ourselves hoping for you. Praying for you. I see the Olympic flame, which will soon enter the stadium, as a symbol of the fire that drives you to fulfill your dreams.

May the fire we see within you, light a fire within each of us. Thank you very much!
It seems to me that Mitt Romney is not flip-flopping... I am beginning to suspect that Mr. Romney is senile - he colors his hair to look younger as Ronald Reagan did - and probably he is suffering from mild Alzheimer - again just like Ronald Reagan - which will automatically disqualify him to be president of the United States of America.

Saturday, July 21, 2012

What is Romney Hiding?

It was a great feeling to see Lawrence O’Donnell present the inaccuracy of Mitt Romney claims about when he left Bain Capital in the exact same way that I did in Facebook for a few days before The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell aired with this basic math: 1977 + 25 = 2002.  In my previous post I presented a video where Romney says that he was at Bain for twenty-five years and I said the same thing but expressed it  differently.

Mitt Romney doesn’t want to submit his previous years tax returns and he just threw a "bone" at us by submitting only last year’s tax return and a projection of what his taxes might be for this year. Big deal! He is a true Wall Street guy, he is presenting a projection, not a tax return; a projection is nothing more than a mere speculation. 

It is my opinion that Mitt Romney might not want to release his tax returns for other years because we will see when he really departed Bain Capital and when he stopped receiving a salary from that company instead of dividends as he has claimed. Another reason might be that on previous tax returns, he either paid zero taxes or way below the miserly 15% shown on the only tax return he has provided. Think about it, if he knowing that he was going to run for the presidency and that he would have to provide his tax returns paid only 15%, imagine what he paid when no one was looking. This goes to show that he never thought he had a real chance to be the Republican contender and was unprepared and now he is caught “off guard” and doesn't know what to do but refuse to provide those records.

Even Ann Romney, his wife, admits that whatever it is in the tax returns will be used against them. Why? All the presidential contenders in the past have submitted several years of tax returns and there were no attacks by either party about those tax returns. Even if Romney's assumptions were true, the President provided 7 years worth of tax returns, why would a mere contender be allowed to give only one? The only possible reason why Romney is so adamant about submitting them must be because he has cheated on his tax returns, he has off-shored his money to countries like the Cayman Islands and Switzerland to evade paying his fair share of taxes.   And he dares to claim that he loves this country but not as much as he loves his money. 

Ann Romney said that Mitt Romney is a "very generous person" and as proof of his generosity she mentioned that he donates 10% of his income to the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints in Utah. Ok, 10% of what?  We have no idea because we can’t see his previous tax returns only the one for 2011. How can she say he is a generous man when all he gives is the minimum tithe required by his church and not a penny more? I'm sorry, but that is not generosity by any standard. Is that “donation” the only one that they can brag about? If this tithe is the only donation he does, then Mitt Romney is a penny-pincher who doesn't care for the needy and not only he is not generous, he is heartless.   Then, she stresses that since he is "so generous" why would he have anything to hide?  The fact that it was her, Ann Romney, the one that unrelated to being generous or not mentioned the fear that we might believe they are hiding something makes me believe they certainly are.

Romney... Have the decency of telling America what is it that you are hiding!

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Everything Old is New Again

Back in 2008, John McCain did an in-depth research on his contender Mitt Romney and now we can find it on line.

I also have attached a video of Mitt Romney saying, in his own words, that he worked at Bain Capital for 25 years.  He created that company in 1977, which means that he was with Bain Capital until 2002 and not 1999 as he is so desperately trying to make us believe.

This man is not fit to be an American, much less an American President!

The video:

Sunday, July 15, 2012

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall... Street

Friday, July 13 the Presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney, took to the airwaves in a futile attempt to “get the records straight” demanding an apology from President Obama for publicly unmasking Romney for his self-claim assertions that he is a “job creator.” Romney is demanding an apology from President Obama for saying the truth, regardless that so far he has repeated lies after lies about President Obama and we are yet to see, read or hear an apology from him. He believes he is too grand to provide an apology.

Romney is claiming that he left, and this he has repeated incessantly, on February 1999. He claims that is the year he left Bain Capital to be in charge of the Utah Olympics. While it is true that he was in charge of the Olympics, what is not true is that he left the company for good and made no decisions about the company after that date. Several documents have surfaced that proves otherwise and list him as CEO, President and Managing Director of Bain Capital during 2000 and 2001. Mitt Romney have said that while he was in Utah overseeing the Olympics he had to travel to attend board meetings and while this is normal, after all he was the owner of that company, what it is not normal is for him to think that anyone is going to believe that as such, he had no saying on the decisions or the course the company was going to take. That it’s inconceivable and if true, a greatly irresponsible behavior towards his investments and that of the investors that placed their trust on Mitt Romney as the owner of that company. If true, is that the kind of President America needs? A President that will not lead but blindly delegate and that will assume no responsibility if anything goes wrong? I don’t think so, we had a president like that before: Ronald Reagan, but at least when Reagan pulled that one off he had Alzheimer.

I honestly believe that his refusal to show his tax returns from 2000 and 2001 is because we will see that he listed Bain Capital as his employer. Nothing else remains to be known but that fact, we all now he off-shores his money, that he has Swiss accounts and a stash of money hidden in the Cayman Islands. We all know he outsources jobs and encourage other American companies to do the same. All there is left for us to know and for him to hide is that he lied about Bain Capital and the his Tax Returns will provide the irrefutable proof that he has not been truthful and expose him as the liar he truly is.

From 1999 to 2002, Bain Capital bought, drove to the ground and destroyed many companies.  During that time thousand of workers were laid-off and hundreds of jobs were outsourced to China and India while making millions of dollars in the process. Business is business and we can’t criticize him for that. However, Mitt Romney should take responsibility for being a great contributor to the demise of the economy, for being a job creator overseas but definitively not in America. He made his bed, let him lay on it instead of desperately trying to disengage from that particular period. Romney's involvement with Bain during that period will debunk his rhetoric as “a job creator.” He is no “job creator” at least not in America; here he is a job destroyer.


For those that still believe that Mitt Romney is a good candidate, we just have to evaluate where most of his investments are, according to his Public FinancialDisclosure Report, signed in 2011, where we can see that he has several million dollars invested in Goldman Sachs and Bank of America among others. We can conclude that, without a doubt, Mitt Romney will remove all regulations from the banking industry. Those regulations on Wall Street are not helping him make more money and that is all he truly cares about. Deregulating Wall Street will serve him well as he truly is a Wall Street guy not because he is rich, but because he is a big component of Wall Street and its collapse.

I can’t comprehend how regular folks out there can back this guy up… a man that all of his life has worked at destroying this country not giving a damn to move it forward and caring only on how much more money he can make. I wonder what deals will he make and what treaties will he sign with China that will allow him to increase his wealth even more at the expense of the American people and the country.


Mother Jones - The Mystery of Romney's Exit from Bain

Mother Jones - Stericycle 13D 1999

The Washington Post - Cash, Advice on Tap at Romney's Old Firm

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission

msnbc news

abc News

Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Sacrificial Lamb

We can find real and solid evidence of what truly matters for Romney and what his core values are under the Regulations tab on his website.

Mitt Romney begins by saying: “Multiple factors contribute to America’s faltering performance. But a major part of the problem over successive presidencies, and one that the Obama administration has sharply exacerbated, is the regulatory burden on the economy. Regulations function as a hidden tax on Americans, with the federal government’s own Small Business Administration placing the price tag at $1.75 trillion annually—much higher than the entire burden of individual and corporate income taxes combined.”

He asks, “How did we reach this state of affairs?” and blames the Federal government and regulations for everything that has gone wrong lately. He desperately tries to portray big corporations and Wall Street as the victims of a blood-sucking vampire named Barack Obama. While these poor corporations and the good people of Wall Street are doing their best to amass more and more wealth regardless of how they obtain it, the sinister government persists in regulating and obstructing them in their effort to make even more money by cheating and stealing from the worthless middle-class. Why would President Obama want to regulate the banking industry and corporations? What does President Obama knows about the market and banking? Does President Obama know more than Wall Street or has the same interest they do to succeed? Wall Street and other corporations are capable of regulating themselves as the responsible companies they are, we must believe this and forget the economic chaos that began just 5 years ago because another puppet thought the exact same thing.

Romney wants to repeat George W. Bush's tactics, but I think he will be even worse and certainly more dangerous than G.W. Bush ever was, if that is possible.

Romney will repeal every one of President Obama’s mandates – even the good ones. We must understand that if it was signed by President Obama, a moderate Democrat that happens to be black, then by default whatever he signed into law must be repealed, period.

Romney also promises to repeal the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act. He will not change it, he will repeal it. Mitt Romney doesn’t believe in regulating Wall Street, as it is his opinion that the economic crisis was not Wall Street’s fault, rather it was the people’s fault for not being savvy enough to know that the bankers were screwing them. He believes that it was our irresponsible desire for a better life that forced bankers to reaffirm that we could afford those houses on our salaries.

It was our mistake for the banks to tell us the price of our houses were going to increase and it was our fault that these banks broke our mortgages in many parts which in turn they sold to various countries around the world making it impossible to collect or sell when the economy crash happened. It was our fault to think that it was safe for our 401K savings to be placed on their hands. Bankers had nothing to do with it. Wall Street's false speculations to drive the prices of stocks and commodities had nothing to do with the economic crash… if anyone is to blame it must be the stupid little investors that believed them!

Among the many things the Dodd-Frank Reform Act ensures is that there will never be another bank “too big to fail” where we, the citizens of this country, will have to help with our tax money those that ripped us off. The irresponsibility of Wall Street drove our economy, and that of the world as well, to the biggest economic crisis since the Big Depression which effects we are still feeling to this day. But Mitt Romney doesn’t want Wall Street to be regulated; he wants to repeal the one regulation that is keeping Wall Street and most banking institutions at bay. It is the Dodd-Frank Reform Act that has forced credit cards companies to be transparent about what they charge us. It is the Dodd-Frank Reform Act that keeps the lavished expenses of bankers under control. But Mitt Romney wants Wall Street and bankers to be like whores out of control, there's no fun if they are restrained. Romney doesn’t want to reform this regulation, he wants to annul it.

Not so with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act signed by George W. Bush, he just wants to reform it. This is a good bill despite that it was signed by Bush. In a nutshell, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (better known by SOX) is intended for Public companies to accurately maintain and present their financial reports, preventing fraud that will affect not only the companies but also the investors. This is bill was sponsored by Senator Paul Sarbanes [D-MD] and Representative Michael G. Oxley [R-OH-4] after the financial scandals of Tyco International, Adelphia, Peregrine Systems, WorldCom and who can forget, Enron. Well, Mitt doesn’t want to repeal it but wants to amend it. I wonder what changes will he make, but I can assure you he will go easy on his friends!

We heard this litany before. We heard it from George W. Bush who lifted most of the regulations that were in place for Wall Street and the banking industry and which is what caused the economic collapse of 2007… and Mitt Romney wants to follow Bush’s steps! There are idiots out there that have forgotten who’s to blame for the condition our country is in and what’s worse, they’ve forgotten what brought us to where we are today: deregulation.

Romney also attacks the EPA. He mentions EPA and the Obama Administration’s war on “carbon dioxide.” For those that don’t know what the war on “carbon dioxide” is, it’s nothing more than the regulation of the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere by a utility plant or the use of carbon dioxide in hydraulic fracturing or what is commonly known as fracking. That is what Romney is complaining about, particularly that the EPA is opposing fracking in areas where there are serious risks of contaminating the potable water in the area. Mitt Romney says he will ask Congress to change the environmental laws to be more “cost efficient,” in other words, rush the permits for drilling anywhere, in any fashion as long as there is an oil company that wants to extract oil, even if it poisons our water supply. And, on top of all that, he will ask the government to provide a few years for companies to comply with whatever environmental rules and guidelines he leaves in place; no rush, let the corporations take their sweet time complying with environmental regulations.

His “concern” is how much the government is spending by enforcing regulations. He makes no mention about how many lives can be saved by these regulations or that the regulations imposed on Wall Street will save us from another collapse in the future. And when I say save “us” I don’t mean the country I mean us, the citizens who through our hard work and by contributing with our unfair share of taxes are the ones that bailed out these fat cats after they ripped us off. No, Romney conveniently leaves those “little” details out of his website. For Romney companies' wealth and well being will always be a priority above that of a citizen and, if you read his website you will realize that he doesn’t hide this fact, he might not express it clearly but he doesn't hide it. He knows that the followers from the Republican Party are supporting him merely because they hate “the black guy in the white house.” These people will not bother to interpret what he is saying they will simply swallow whatever he pushes down their throat.

Under his Plan section, he promises to “tear down” the majority of the regulations created by the Obama administration. He also promises to change the “federal bureaucracy” in order to “ensure economic growth” as the most important factor when new regulations are created. In other words, money and not health, money and not the environment, money and not people is his number one priority.

Out of all the regulations implemented by the government, only the ones created by the Obama administration will be annulled, previous ones will be “carefully scrutinized” but not necessarily repealed.

Romney says that he will repeal Romneycare, oops! Sorry, Obamacare. It doesn’t matter that the Health Care plan signed by President Obama was based on Mitt Romney's own health care plan. The Koch brothers hate it and therefore, so does he. It is for that fact that Mitt Romney doesn’t deserve any respect. When a person is capable of hating and criticizing their own creation to please those that contribute financially to their campaign, which means that they are willing to sell their soul to the devil to get what they want. This type of people has no dignity, no self-respect and no values.

The worst part of his “plan” is the regulatory zero cap. That simply means that in order for a new regulation to be implemented, all previous regulations will be null and void and only the last one is valid. Let’s say that there is a regulation that prohibits certain ingredients in our food because it has been proven they cause dangerous or life threatening side effects. A new regulation is created that doesn’t mention all the prohibited ingredients – perhaps because companies are no longer using them. The prohibition of these ingredients will no longer be prohibited because they will not be in the new regulation and the previous regulations where repealed. This concept will come in effect for every single regulation that exists. Romney is proposing the regulatory zero cap to save money. If the government were to ensure that this oversight would not happen, then it will have to spend millions hiring an army of readers to go through each and every regulation (some regulations are 800 pages or more) with a fine comb to make sure that what is vital remains in the new regulation. This will not only be time consuming but also will be a tremendous risk for the safety of the country, the environment and the citizens.

Of course, he is also proposing a reform on the legal liability system “to prevent spurious litigation,” but if the regulatory zero cap comes into effect, most future litigation will not be "spurious" it will be the result of Romney's irresponsible and greedy behavior that caused the assault on the environment and the health of the citizens. Mitt Romney wants to change the laws so whatever happens as a result of the zero cap regulations, we won't be able to litigate, fight back or be compensated.

That is Romney, the Koch brothers, Citizen’s United and the GOP for you. For them money is god and we are the sacrificial lamb.

Monday, July 9, 2012

When Youth Fades Away

Medicare is the culprit of all evil for every Republican in Congress. They blame public programs such as Medicare for the economic crisis and the increases in our national budget. The numerous wars, the over expending in weapons which never seems to be enough, their salaries and lavish expenditures, the unregulated banking industry and of course over a decade of tax cuts to the very wealthy have not contributed at all to the current economic crisis, only Medicare and public programs for the poor and the elderly need to be “reformed” because they are the ones depleting our funds.  Really?

It is funny that all three branches enjoy the benefits of  Medicare  but Republicans are not willing to part with it, all these benefits are a necessity for them and a parasitic luxury for the rest of America.

On his website, Romney says that President Obama has “attacked” every proposal suggested by Republicans. I think our President has defended rather than attack, the rights of the American citizens. What the Republicans have been proposing [and this is nothing new] is to privatize Medicare. The government will determine how much money a senior will receive to “help” them pay their insurance premiums. Basically, what that means is that Medicare will be eliminated and seniors will have to acquire private insurance. Of course, the consumer will choose the insurance they can afford, if they are to choose a more expensive option they will pay for the difference themselves. The problem with this, among many other things, is that those seniors that must opt for the more expensive option due to certain medical needs will have to pay out of pocket for it. Once again, only the wealthy retirees will be able to enjoy good health care when they reach their golden years, the poor seniors will have to shop around, be inundated with verbiage they don’t understand and where only the premium cost will be important, not their health since they won't be able to afford it.

According to Mitt Romney, the amount that will be provided to seniors to cover their premiums will be a fixed amount. I wonder if the “fixed” amount will take into consideration ailments that affect certain seniors but not all seniors. For example, will it be more for seniors that need an organ transplant or have gone through a transplant that requires follow ups with specialists and expensive medications for life? Will it be more for seniors with BP or diabetes? Will any of this matter when assessing the “fixed” amount?  We will not find the answers to these questions on Mitt Romney's site and in the usual Romneyism that characterize him, he is devious enough not to speak clearly or stand firmly on what he proposes - he knows that if we know the truth he doesn't stand a chance of ever being elected.

Romney, who “hates” government interference in private companies or on how they run their businesses, is going to demand that all insurance companies offer a comparable plan to today’s Medicare. Yeah, right!

Romney justifies the “fixed support” amount provided by the government as a tool because according to him it will empower seniors with the choice of purchasing less expensive plans and use the leftover to pay for  “other medical expenses like co-pays and deductibles.” So, on top of losing the security of Medicare, now the elderly who are almost at poverty line levels must pay for co-payments and deductibles set by private insurance companies. The party that cried that “Obamacare” had death panels doesn’t need “death panels”… They know that by privatizing Medicare most of our poor seniors will die, if not by choosing the worse but cheapest plan then by starvation. It is sad when a person that has worked all of their lives have to choose between medication and food since their funds won’t allow them to afford both.

Mitt explains that the government will still provide traditional Medicare but since this coverage will cost more to the government, seniors that wish to keep that plan will have to pay even higher premiums than those selecting private insurance.

In every civilized society in the world, seniors are viewed as a treasure to cherish. An endless source of wisdom and who most of the time binds a family together. Not in the United States, here seniors are seen as a burden, useless and who many of them die in a nursing home all alone because their children are too busy to be bothered with taking care of them. The Republicans are a perfect example of these views; they believe that seniors are a burden to society and especially to the government. A government that for decades demanded and took without hesitation the taxes these citizens contributed with, a government that had no problem asking them to go to war to “defend” our country in faraway lands that never posed a physical thread to us, such as Vietnam. A government that when have asked, these seniors responded by saying “Present!” but now, at the sunset of their lives, they can no longer say “Present!” so they are a bothersome group that Republicans cannot wait to get rid of, unless they are wealthy, of course. And we all know that the wealthier these seniors are, the most likely that they never said “Present!”

The Romney/Ryan plan claims [to read a previous post explaining in detail what the Ryan plan entails and with a link to the actual plan, click here] that will give a “more generous support” to lower income seniors and wealthier seniors will receive less. Why not remove wealthy seniors altogether? Wealthy seniors can afford to pay for full premium coverage without government help; they don’t need that “support” check. But no, the thought of not helping the wealthy it's unthinkable for the GOP. How can they tell a wealthy person that the government will not help them because they don’t need it but that they are going to help the poor instead? That will be outrageous, a sacrilege! But they can tell a poor senior “sorry, this is all we can help you with… not enough? Do all of us a favor and die quickly!

Once more, Romney is counting on the “good heart” of insurance companies. We must remember that he has promised to repeal Obamacare on his first day in office, among about a thousand other things he promised to take care on his very first day in office. Thanks to Obamacare, insurance companies can't raise their premiums or cancel your policy for a pre-existing condition, they can't drop you if you get sick and insurance companies must expend at least 80% of their profits on their policy-holders' medical expenses. If Romney wins (may the Spaghetti Flying Monster have mercy on us!) and repeals Obamacare, those provisions will also be repealed. We all know that insurance companies have never lowered their premiums no matter how many policy holders they have, the rich just seem to not have enough money and the more they have, the more they want.  We all know the true "heart" of insurance companies and it is not a pretty one.

We are reaching the boiling point, where the 1% will be the only ones entitled to “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” while the rest of the 99%, will have no Life worth living, no Liberty since we will be the peons of the 1% and not entitled to the pursuit of happiness… we will have not the money nor the health to pursuit it.

Sunday, July 8, 2012

Latin America: The Insanity Tactic

Political Cartoonist: Matt Wuerker
Moving forward reviewing Mitt Romney’s observations about current Issues, I opened the tab  "Latin America."
Romney opens the subject with what is rapidly becoming the Republican’s trademark: fear. He claims that the current administration is jeopardizing the “security, democracy, and increased economic ties with America.” Romney, of course, fails to mention why he believes that. Instead, he places the blame on President Obama for taking him three years to sign the Colombia Trade Agreement. To be honest, I am not thrilled with this or any other Trade Agreements; so far all they have been good for is to destroy our industries.

However, this particular agreement was already approved when President Obama took office.

Colombian workers and union members have been killed for 25 years by groups that oppose unions, and only a handful of people have ever been convicted for these crimes. The trade agreement signed by President George W. Bush required no action from the government of Colombia to protect Colombian workers and Unions. It took all this time for President Obama’s administration to negotiate with the Colombian government to secure the protection for these workers and the unions as well as the commitment from the government to investigate and prosecute crimes against workers and unions. As a result, the Colombia government agreed to the terms demanded by President Obama and the agreement was finally signed. As it is usual not only with Mitt Romney but with all republicans, he conveniently failed to mention the reason, after all it was related to the safety of workers and unions, which for Romney and republicans are both worthless. In the same paragraph Romney talks about Cuba and Venezuela, drug trafficking and the violence that is eminent in Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean. Again, he fails to mention how or why the current administration is to be blamed for what is happening in the Americas.
On the next paragraph he outlines what he considers President Obama’s “failures.” Romney holds the President responsible for not reversing what it is happening throughout Latin America and bluntly accuses President Obama of worsening the situation by “reaching out to those nations that are working against our interests and values.” Those nations, I am assuming, can only be Cuba and Venezuela.
As every single republican has done in the past – with no results – Romney advocates the same strategy, which is to strengthen the embargo to Cuba and apparently severing all communications with Venezuela. After half a century since the implementation of the embargo that has yielded no beneficial results neither for the dissident Cubans in Miami nor for the Cubans in the island, Republicans criticize President Obama for making it easier for the exiled Cuban population in the United States to visit or financially help their relatives trapped in the island. I have always found it odd that republicans, who claim to own the sole proprietorship on family values and the likes, can't understand what it means to have a child, parents and loved ones suffering when you can help and have a government telling you "let them eat cake!"  And those Cubans holding a seat in Congress are the worst of them all, it is easy to be adamant to help the people in the island when you have no one there and you are living in the lap of luxury.

Fifty years later, republicans still support the failed embargo; I think they have never heard the definition of insanity… Perhaps, that explains their erratic, demented and illogical approach to the problems of this nation. Maybe they repeat the same tactics, over and over, expecting a different result to proof that they are insane in the eventuality that the citizens of this country ever accuse them of treason and demand their incarceration. I don’t know, but the embargo is the biggest failure that has been beneficial to one person: Fidel Castro. It is thanks to the embargo that the world sees Castro as a victim, a hero, an inspiration and a role model. It is due to the embargo that the world sides with a tyrant, viewing this tyrant as a martyr – the modern version of the biblical story of David and Goliath. Republicans know this too well, but they will never vote to lift the embargo.  There has always been a trade with Cuba but restricted to only food and medicine.  Only  big corporations can benefit from this trade, Cubans in exile, Americans and small businesses cannot. Click here to see a list of companies that were issued a license to trade with Cuba from 1985 to 2001 as well as other pertinent information dating back to 2001.
I have tried to find a current list of licensed exporters to Cuba, but it was impossible. I suspect that republicans have special interest for them to refuse to lift the embargo; they never do anything for nothing. So far, it hasn’t worked and you would think that after half a century they would try something different, but that is not the case. We all know that the only thing that motivates republicans is money and their immovable position on the matter makes me think that they must be getting some sort of rewards from the few companies authorized to trade with Cuba, which are all large corporations and many pharmaceutical companies.

The Venezuela-USA relationships are not the friendliest; I guess that Mitt Romney is following the ballistic obsession of most republicans.   Negotiations and a cold relationship between the countries is considered by Romney to be reaching out, nothing but invading to destitute the elected President of Venezuela is valid.  
Romney continues his relentless attack on President Obama by accusing him of siding with Honduras’ ex-President Manuel Zelaya. Apparently Mitt Romney has no idea what diplomacy is or that the United States will never accept or intervene in a coup d’état, which is what happened in Honduras. Romney doesn’t understand how diplomacy works or that the United States can comment, negotiate, recommend but should not interfere in matters from other countries. At the same time, unless resolved by the country in question, the United States can’t recognize a government taken by force, militarily as it happened in Honduras. That concept is unbeknownst to him.
Romney's “Plan”
Mitt Romney will chart a different course. Under a Romney administration, the United States will pursue an active role in Latin America by supporting democratic allies and market-based economic relationships, containing destabilizing internal forces such as criminal gangs and terrorists, and opposing destabilizing outside influences such as Iran.
The above is the core of what his “plan” is.  Apparently, it is his opinion that President Obama doesn’t do any of these things. He insinuates that President Obama has ignored Latin America or the violence that is infesting the continent. Romney insists in free trade, which I am sure will have no demands for workers, concentrating only in the profits corporations can obtain. He dreams of the day when, through these free trade agreements, these countries can become members of the “Reagan Economic Zone.” The “Reagan Economic Zone” is a fantasy of Mitt Romney and republicans which is nothing more than a conglomerate of countries where the lucky members [corporations] can enjoy doing business without regulations, crushing unions and paying less to their workers. The ultimate republican fantasy!
Mitt Romney also wants to create a “Unified Hemispheric Joint Task Force on Crime and Terrorism.” That's a mouthful! Romney wants military-to-military training between the United States and Mexico to combat the narco-trafficking and narco-terrorists. Every administration has failed on this absurd "war on drugs," including President Obama and so will any president that comes after unless the strategy changes. In countries where the vast majority of people live below the poverty line, the only possibility these people see to come out of the slums is by trafficking drugs. We, as a country, are largely to blame; we are the consumers. As long as there is a demand there will be a supply and Romney, who claims to be a savvy businessman, should know this. The only way the violence associated with drugs and the lure of wealth will cease is by legalizing drugs, tax them and control them. If we were to dispense the drugs as we do alcohol and control it as we do with any prescription drug the demand will greatly diminish. The income produced by the distribution of these “legal” drugs, could be used to provide rehabilitation for the addicts and the ease our debt. That is the only way we can, once and for all, end the drug-trafficking violence and reduce the drug addiction, nothing else will work.
Mitt Romney closes this section stating that we will use the “full power of the presidency” to complete the border fence. That fantastic and super expensive fence that, just as the “war on drugs,” will serve for nothing but an exaggerated waste of funds that we don’t have but that is a immense selling point to the greatest oxymoron in this country: The Right.

Tuesday, July 3, 2012

For the Love of Money

This is the third and final analysis of Mitt Romney’s views on the Labor Issue. The last entry on the Labor tab is Mitt Romney’s Plan. Yes, you heard right, he has a plan! He opens his “plan” with four bullets:

• Appoint experienced and even-handed arbiters to the NLRB

• Guarantee businesses the right to allocate capital as they choose

• Protect right of workers to choose whether to unionize

• End funding of union political campaigns through paycheck deductions

I think that knowing as we do that Mitt Romney’s only concern is protecting and defending corporations, that he will appoint corporate lawyers as arbiters to the NLRB. By doing this, he will ensure that corporations have a stronghold on the negotiations. Next bullet he is an avid advocate and it’s one of the few things that he really does what he preaches: Allowing companies to move their money to wherever they want. Mitt Romney has been doing that for years, he has most of his money in a Swiss account and in a Cayman Island account. Sure he wants to make that practice legal! Not only he wants to outsource jobs but also he wants companies to bank offshore. Great patriotism!

It is clear that he needed to say something about workers, after all what is “labor” if not workers? So he throws what he thinks is a bone to that stinky, smelling working class: the right to choose whether to unionize or not, that is, that is what he will do for the American worker. In his quest to unbalance the political arena, he will make it impossible for Unions to get funding to support political campaigns that will be detrimental for the workforce.  Only Citizens United have the right to fund political campaigns… Let’s not forget that corporations are “people” now, Unions are not.

He continues to praise the American worker but not only does he contradicts himself but once again he confuses Corporations with workers. He mentions that we are contenders “for the world’s top spot in labor productivity.” If that is true, why does he wants to make it easier for companies to bring foreigners to fill executive positions that can be performed by an American, or outsource jobs that a blue-collar worker can do? I wonder why “journalists” don’t ask him that question.

Mitt Romney believes that the best trait of the American workforce is its “flexibility.” Of course, Unions are to be blamed for pressing for measures that according to Mitt puts the Corporations in jeopardy to compete. Really? The only reason why he believes this is because he doesn’t want corporations to be forced to protect the well being of their workers or for workers to get paid overtime. He doesn’t want Unions to protect employees that otherwise would be fired simply because they are approaching the retirement age. He would prefer that companies save money by not being regulated, to provide a safe environment by expending in safety gear or equipment. He wants companies to be allowed to pay less to women performing the same job of a man. Perhaps even limiting vacations to one week regardless of the years in the company or not paying for vacation, period. We must not forget that for corporations and Mitt Romney you are just a number, a tool for the company to profit, if you are not working you are not producing for the company and why would a company pay for you not to work?

In order to analyze the impact that Unions and Right-to-Work [RTW] has had I obtained the unemployment rate for all the States from the Bureau of Labor Statistics to compare RTW States vs. Union States.  I separated the States into regions: Southern, Northern, Central, Western and Pacific. The States that have embraced the “Right-to-Work” the year they enacted the law is shown in brackets and "Union" States are shown without numbers inside brackets. 

Click here to enlarge
Click here to enlarge
Click here to enlarge  
Click here to enlarge
Click here to enlarge  

Then, I created a National chart; in brackets you can see how many States in each Region have adopted the RTW law. For example, the Western Region is composed of 11 States, eight of those States have enacted the RTW law and three are Union States.  The difference is not impressive. 
Click here to enlarge

There are many factors that contribute to the reason that companies close their doors, but Unions are not the main factor. There are other factors that are far more devastating than Unions. The most threatening is unfair Trade and unregulated trade practices. We all know that what has been the major cause for manufacturing companies to either close their door or for massive lay-offs has been the outsourcing of jobs to far away places such as China, Taiwan, India, Mexico and Brazil among others. The manufacturing of items in these countries with costs at a fraction of what it would cost to produce them in the United States has not only killed our National Industries, but our economy as well. The excuse is that mass-producing overseas is what allows the prices to remain accessible. That is not necessarily true; we seemed to be just fine when we produced what we consumed. The main reason these companies betrayed and continue to betray the United States and rob the American citizens of a productive and prosperous life is not so that we can buy their crap at a reasonable price, rather it is to make huge profits on an equal or even less investment at little or no risk.

It is obvious how much corporations love this country. When faced with the possibility of having to pay taxes, instead of doing the responsible thing and make their fair contribution to help the country and the economy move forward they choose to dismantle their corporations and move overseas. So far, they have been off-shoring their profits but maintaining at least the executive jobs in our shores. After decades of unimaginable margins of profit, after a decade of paying little or no taxes and even receiving huge tax incentives, they show their patriotism by going somewhere else. The government should impose a fine of $5B or more to every company that leaves our shores. I am sure that if the government were to do that, companies would think twice before packing and leaving the country that “made” them. Unfortunately, that will not happen… Republicans in Congress will not allow it and they will continue to kiss the feet (and the asses) of those that are betraying America but filling their wallets.