Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Wait, there's more. The Globe also plagiarized, again. They are in competition with the NYT, I guess.Wow! You believe anything the Boston Globe prints? Try going to Breaking news and opinion on The Blaze and read the article printed by Fortune magazine. It totally debunks the Globe's account of when Romney actually left "managing" Bain. The person who provided most of the info for the Globe's article is a regular contributor to the Democrats. Need I say more? This is nothing more than a hit piece ala the hit piece Dan Rather pulled on George W. Bush. Where is Rather now? Oh yeah, he is gone.
Ah, but you brought it up and it has nothing to do with much of anything here - Bain, GM, etc. It's on the forefront of your mind and you project it often. It's an emotional thing.
And, it's an observation of what you do. You let your emotions get a grip on you and it clouds your thought as reflected in your posts.
See, I think you have a lot to offer, if you can get a grip on those emotions.
Anyway, it's advice. And that's worth what you paid for it...nothing.Only you are able to add value to advice.
It looks like I just made you cry.Ah, but you brought it up and it has nothing to do with much of anything here - Bain, GM, etc. It's on the forefront of your mind and you project it often. It's an emotional thing.
Shut the fuck up. You just got caught making shit up about what I actually posted and in order to not look like the dummy you are, you're creating even more Straw Men. It's completely relevant because it's a parallel you can draw between people who want Capitalism/Business to invade government tend to be the same that have no problem with Religion entering government too. You're either a) too stupid to grasp this concept b) too afraid to admit it's true or c) have so much of the GOP wee-wee in your face that you can't see the truth.
And, it's an observation of what you do. You let your emotions get a grip on you and it clouds your thought as reflected in your posts.
LOL.
See, I think you have a lot to offer, if you can get a grip on those emotions.
Also LOL. Here's a clue, Si Modo, just because I can speak with passion and in a forceful way, doesn't mean I'm hysterical or emotional at all. It just means that I believe in what I say and have actual evidence to back it up. You're doing a really shitty job at playing armchair psychologist.
Anyway, it's advice. And that's worth what you paid for it...nothing.
*fart*
Wow! You believe anything the Boston Globe prints? Try going to Breaking news and opinion on The Blaze and read the article printed by Fortune magazine. It totally debunks the Globe's account of when Romney actually left "managing" Bain. The person who provided most of the info for the Globe's article is a regular contributor to the Democrats. Need I say more? This is nothing more than a hit piece ala the hit piece Dan Rather pulled on George W. Bush. Where is Rather now? Oh yeah, he is gone.
It looks like I just made you cry.Ah, but you brought it up and it has nothing to do with much of anything here - Bain, GM, etc. It's on the forefront of your mind and you project it often. It's an emotional thing.
Shut the fuck up. You just got caught making shit up about what I actually posted and in order to not look like the dummy you are, you're creating even more Straw Men. It's completely relevant because it's a parallel you can draw between people who want Capitalism/Business to invade government tend to be the same that have no problem with Religion entering government too. You're either a) too stupid to grasp this concept b) too afraid to admit it's true or c) have so much of the GOP wee-wee in your face that you can't see the truth.
LOL.
Also LOL. Here's a clue, Si Modo, just because I can speak with passion and in a forceful way, doesn't mean I'm hysterical or emotional at all. It just means that I believe in what I say and have actual evidence to back it up. You're doing a really shitty job at playing armchair psychologist.
Anyway, it's advice. And that's worth what you paid for it...nothing.
*fart*
Well no it's not..and I'm not very into sports analogies when it comes to government. In any case..sports analogies are not very good..since a good amount of their funding comes directly from tax payers. It's an industry that really doesn't stand on it's own.
As to your second point..it's sort of convoluted. In my post, I pointed out..that Romney knows how to maximize profit..and is very good at it. It's his governance that is questionable. He doesn't have a very good record as governor. And the one thing that he might point out as an accomplishment, Romneycare, is something he's not running on. Thus in terms of overall governance, I, personally think Obama is a better man for the job. Being President isn't only about maximizing profit. There are other elements involved.
Romney Testified He Maintained Business Ties During Olympics | TPM2012Well no it's not..and I'm not very into sports analogies when it comes to government. In any case..sports analogies are not very good..since a good amount of their funding comes directly from tax payers. It's an industry that really doesn't stand on it's own.
As to your second point..it's sort of convoluted. In my post, I pointed out..that Romney knows how to maximize profit..and is very good at it. It's his governance that is questionable. He doesn't have a very good record as governor. And the one thing that he might point out as an accomplishment, Romneycare, is something he's not running on. Thus in terms of overall governance, I, personally think Obama is a better man for the job. Being President isn't only about maximizing profit. There are other elements involved.
Are you STILL trying to pump this Bain Birther Bullshit?
How are you any better than the troll Conservaderrps?
^^^^ I hit your dave button. Serendipity is sweet.It looks like I just made you cry.Shut the fuck up. You just got caught making shit up about what I actually posted and in order to not look like the dummy you are, you're creating even more Straw Men. It's completely relevant because it's a parallel you can draw between people who want Capitalism/Business to invade government tend to be the same that have no problem with Religion entering government too. You're either a) too stupid to grasp this concept b) too afraid to admit it's true or c) have so much of the GOP wee-wee in your face that you can't see the truth.
LOL.
Also LOL. Here's a clue, Si Modo, just because I can speak with passion and in a forceful way, doesn't mean I'm hysterical or emotional at all. It just means that I believe in what I say and have actual evidence to back it up. You're doing a really shitty job at playing armchair psychologist.
*fart*
U R Dumb.
The bottom line here is the filing with the SEC.
Romney can't get around that. That's what did in Ken Lay.
While Romney wasn't involved in anything illegal (thus far), his story doesn't line up with the documentation.
And calling the President a "liar" was way off base. He's going to have to eat alot of crow to back out of that one..or double down.
Well no it's not..and I'm not very into sports analogies when it comes to government. In any case..sports analogies are not very good..since a good amount of their funding comes directly from tax payers. It's an industry that really doesn't stand on it's own.
As to your second point..it's sort of convoluted. In my post, I pointed out..that Romney knows how to maximize profit..and is very good at it. It's his governance that is questionable. He doesn't have a very good record as governor. And the one thing that he might point out as an accomplishment, Romneycare, is something he's not running on. Thus in terms of overall governance, I, personally think Obama is a better man for the job. Being President isn't only about maximizing profit. There are other elements involved.
Are you STILL trying to pump this Bain Birther Bullshit?
How are you any better than the troll Conservaderrps?
The bottom line here is the filing with the SEC.
Romney can't get around that. That's what did in Ken Lay.
While Romney wasn't involved in anything illegal (thus far), his story doesn't line up with the documentation.
And calling the President a "liar" was way off base. He's going to have to eat alot of crow to back out of that one..or double down.
We'll just call you the "Bain Birthers."
^^^^ I hit your dave button. Serendipity is sweet.It looks like I just made you cry.
U R Dumb.
Mitt Romney stayed at Bain three years longer than he claimed: As weve previously noted, Mitt Romney twice told the Government Ethics Office that he left Bain Capital in February 1999, but there has been plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise. When he left Bain is a critical question, both because a different date than the one he claimed could mean he lied on official forms, and also because Romney has used the early departure date to insulate himself from attacks on Bains practices during the early 2000s.
But the Boston Globe reports today that Romney stayed on a full three years longer at Bain than he has claimed. Securities and Exchange Commission documents filed the in the years after 1999 list Romney as the sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president of Bain. And a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002.
Romneys Bain lie - Salon.com
On a media conference call about the Globe story, Stephanie Cutter, Obamas deputy campaign manager, said the story proves that Romney had full control of Bain during this time and therefore directly responsible for decisions made at companies in which Bain invested. Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony. Or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investments, Cutter said.
But we see little new in any of these SEC filings, and a University of Pennsylvania Law School professor we spoke to sees no basis for the Obama campaigns claim that Romney committed a felony.
None of the SEC filings show that Romney was anything but a passive, absentee owner during that time, as both Romney and Bain have long said. It should not surprise anyone that Romney retained certain titles while he was working out the final disposition of his ownership, for example. We see nothing to contradict the statement that a Bain spokesman issued in response to the Globe article:
Bain Capital, July 12: Due to the sudden nature of Mr. Romneys departure, he remained the sole stockholder for a time while formal ownership was being documented and transferred to the group of partners who took over management of the firm in 1999. Accordingly, Mr. Romney was reported in various capacities on SEC filings during this period.
Jill E. Fisch, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School and co-director of the Institute for Law and Economics, said Romney would not have committed a felony by listing himself as managing director even if he now claims he had no role in running the company after February 1999. There is no legal obligation to describe how active one is in the day-to-day management of the company, she said. And just because he held title of managing director doesnt necessarily mean that hes responsible for decisions like layoffs or outsourcing.
This story is going to get bigger and bigger until Team Romney says SOMETHING. I have a feeling they are freaking the fuck out behind the scenes.
Romney Testified He Maintained Business Ties During Olympics | TPM2012
Mitt Romney stayed at Bain three years longer than he claimed: As weve previously noted, Mitt Romney twice told the Government Ethics Office that he left Bain Capital in February 1999, but there has been plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise. When he left Bain is a critical question, both because a different date than the one he claimed could mean he lied on official forms, and also because Romney has used the early departure date to insulate himself from attacks on Bains practices during the early 2000s.
But the Boston Globe reports today that Romney stayed on a full three years longer at Bain than he has claimed. Securities and Exchange Commission documents filed the in the years after 1999 list Romney as the sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president of Bain. And a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002.
Romneys Bain lie - Salon.com
Actually the globe got it wrong and you are continuing a dishonest portrayal.
FactCheck.org : Romneys Bain Years: New Evidence, Same Conclusion
On a media conference call about the Globe story, Stephanie Cutter, Obamas deputy campaign manager, said the story proves that Romney had full control of Bain during this time and therefore directly responsible for decisions made at companies in which Bain invested. Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony. Or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investments, Cutter said.
But we see little new in any of these SEC filings, and a University of Pennsylvania Law School professor we spoke to sees no basis for the Obama campaigns claim that Romney committed a felony.
None of the SEC filings show that Romney was anything but a passive, absentee owner during that time, as both Romney and Bain have long said. It should not surprise anyone that Romney retained certain titles while he was working out the final disposition of his ownership, for example. We see nothing to contradict the statement that a Bain spokesman issued in response to the Globe article:
Bain Capital, July 12: Due to the sudden nature of Mr. Romneys departure, he remained the sole stockholder for a time while formal ownership was being documented and transferred to the group of partners who took over management of the firm in 1999. Accordingly, Mr. Romney was reported in various capacities on SEC filings during this period.
Jill E. Fisch, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School and co-director of the Institute for Law and Economics, said Romney would not have committed a felony by listing himself as managing director even if he now claims he had no role in running the company after February 1999. There is no legal obligation to describe how active one is in the day-to-day management of the company, she said. And just because he held title of managing director doesnt necessarily mean that hes responsible for decisions like layoffs or outsourcing.
Try again Ravi
This story is going to get bigger and bigger until Team Romney says SOMETHING. I have a feeling they are freaking the fuck out behind the scenes.
Romney Testified He Maintained Business Ties During Olympics | TPM2012
They've already said something.
They've said it's a fabrication and they have already backed their side with statements from the Federal Trade Commission.
It is simply a lie fabricated by Obama in an attempt to make a candidate that has a clean record look like a criminal.
We're still waiting on those Fast & Furious documents BTW.
Mitt Romney stayed at Bain three years longer than he claimed: As weve previously noted, Mitt Romney twice told the Government Ethics Office that he left Bain Capital in February 1999, but there has been plenty of evidence suggesting otherwise. When he left Bain is a critical question, both because a different date than the one he claimed could mean he lied on official forms, and also because Romney has used the early departure date to insulate himself from attacks on Bains practices during the early 2000s.
But the Boston Globe reports today that Romney stayed on a full three years longer at Bain than he has claimed. Securities and Exchange Commission documents filed the in the years after 1999 list Romney as the sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president of Bain. And a Massachusetts financial disclosure form Romney filed in 2003 states that he still owned 100 percent of Bain Capital in 2002.
Romneys Bain lie - Salon.com
Actually the globe got it wrong and you are continuing a dishonest portrayal.
FactCheck.org : Romneys Bain Years: New Evidence, Same Conclusion
On a media conference call about the Globe story, Stephanie Cutter, Obamas deputy campaign manager, said the story proves that Romney had full control of Bain during this time and therefore directly responsible for decisions made at companies in which Bain invested. Either Mitt Romney, through his own words and his own signature, was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony. Or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investments, Cutter said.
But we see little new in any of these SEC filings, and a University of Pennsylvania Law School professor we spoke to sees no basis for the Obama campaigns claim that Romney committed a felony.
None of the SEC filings show that Romney was anything but a passive, absentee owner during that time, as both Romney and Bain have long said. It should not surprise anyone that Romney retained certain titles while he was working out the final disposition of his ownership, for example. We see nothing to contradict the statement that a Bain spokesman issued in response to the Globe article:
Bain Capital, July 12: Due to the sudden nature of Mr. Romneys departure, he remained the sole stockholder for a time while formal ownership was being documented and transferred to the group of partners who took over management of the firm in 1999. Accordingly, Mr. Romney was reported in various capacities on SEC filings during this period.
Jill E. Fisch, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School and co-director of the Institute for Law and Economics, said Romney would not have committed a felony by listing himself as managing director even if he now claims he had no role in running the company after February 1999. There is no legal obligation to describe how active one is in the day-to-day management of the company, she said. And just because he held title of managing director doesnt necessarily mean that hes responsible for decisions like layoffs or outsourcing.
Try again Ravi
Mitt Romney's Own 2002 Testimony Undermines Bain Departure Claim
They've already said something.
They've said it's a fabrication and they have already backed their side with statements from the Federal Trade Commission.
It is simply a lie fabricated by Obama in an attempt to make a candidate that has a clean record look like a criminal.
We're still waiting on those Fast & Furious documents BTW.
