Benghazi 2.0 and The Republican Party in Action!

by Nomad

Nothing means success to the Congressional Republicans like last year's failure. They've just declared the wild goose chase known as Benghazi will re-commence and taxpayers can expect more time and money to be wasted.

Despite a definitive report which found absolutely no validity to any of the wild allegations made by Republicans, the GOP in House has decided to reconvene the Select Committee on Benghazi later this year. 

Using their majority, the Republican procedurally dismissed Democrat's rejections, by preventing any debate on the continuation of the special panel. Furthermore the panel was given an open budget and no limits for its work. 

As Yahoo points out, this one panel alone (there were at one time five ongoing committee investigations on this one event) cost "upwards of $1 million to operate last Congress, when the House voted to establish it."

How the Facts about Benghazi Bring an End to the Republican Lying Game

by Nomad

After two long years of investigating the Benghazi incident, the Republicans were forced to admit that all of the slanderous claims made against Obama and his administration were, in fact, untrue.
Nobody wants to talk about holding anybody to account now.

This week the last chapter in the pathetic Benghazi attack saga was finally written.

Hopefully. 
After years of constant (some said faked) outrage about the tragic events in September 2012, the final report by the Republican Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence was very quietly released. It should have been big news. The mainstream media however barely reported it. 

That's not a surprise perhaps since this report- direct from the Committee itself- absolutely vindicated the Obama administration's version of events.

The investigations really started on that night with presidential candidate Mitt Romney's famous smirk. For a president seeking re-election, the timing of the Libyan event couldn't have been worse. The tragedy allowed the Republicans to paint the entire administration as incompetent, careless, and able to react to an unfolding crisis. Weak leadership, in a word.

Unfortunately, Romney overplayed his hand and his opportunism backfired miserably, leading one commentator to call the candidate's press conference   "one of the most craven and ill-advised tactical moves in this entire campaign." 

Fox News however called Romney's remarks about the Benghazi attack a demonstration of his "Reaganesque commitment to American resolve in our might."

On that night, the battle lines were drawn.

The Romney Connection: Why Marriott Fired a Candidate Worker

by Nomad

A Florida case poses the question: What happens when the First Amendment rights of an employee comes into conflict with the corporate free speech guaranteed by the Citizens United decision?

Is it legal for an employer to fire  workers who campaign against their corporate-supported candidate?

Raw Story has a story about a Democratic candidate running for Osceola County Commission who was fired for attempting to unseat the candidate her company supports. Viviana Janer's employer, Marriott Vacations Worldwide reportedly gave her the choice of either quitting her campaign or losing her job of 11 years.

Janer told reporters:

“After a decade of accolades and promotions, I was told my job would be abruptly terminated if I did not drop out of the race. Despite my wish to continue working, I felt I could not turn my back on the many citizens of Osceola County who worked so hard to get me elected. I refused to drop out of the race, and on Friday I was fired from a job I loved.”

According to the termination letter from Senior Vice President and Chief Audit Executive Julie Meyer, Janer was fired because she had not received permission to run for office. 

However, as Janer pointed out, company policy actually encourages political involvement in general.  

Here's how the employee guidelines read:

Marriott Vacations Worldwide encourages your personal participation in elections and government processes. However, you must conduct your personal political activities on your own time and without use of the company’s resources (e.g., stationery, copying machines, or office supplies).

Romney’s Million Dollar Campaign Contributor Considers Tax Escape to Puerto Rico

by Nomad

At the beginning of last year, before the presidential campaign had really gotten underway, Nomadic Politics reported that one of Mitt Romney’s high- dollar contributors to his Restore Our Future SuperPAC was hedge fund billionaire, John Paulson. Now it seems as though, Paulson might be considering leaving the country altogether. Bloomberg last week mentioned Puerto Rico as a possible new home. (His hedge fund, however, issued a denial of the story.)

Paulson belonged to an exclusive club of uber-wealthy Romney backers who, even before the Republican nomination, were willing to write a cool million check for Romney’s bid for the White House. What's a million between friends?
Why, that's chicken feed for a man like Paulson, whose net worth, according to Forbes was almost $16 billion. (The year prior to the SuperPAC contribution he reportedly earned staggering 5 billion.)

But it was all for naught, in the end. Investing in Romney proved to be an expensive proposition with very limited returns. However, the opposite can be said of Paulson's investments during the economic crisis. Wall Street analysts say that Paulson became outrageously successful by betting on failure, from the collapse of banks to the mortgage crisis. 

The Small Town in Illinois that Bishop Jenky Forgot

by Nomad

Strange Remarks from a Bishop

Back in April of this year, Catholic Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria, Illinois began a rambling sermon called "A Call to Catholic Men of Faith" with this observation: 

There is only one basic reason why Christianity exists and that is the fact that Jesus Christ truly rose from the grave.

It's quite a strange statement when you think about it but so boldly stated that few had to courage to challenge it. The resurrection was only one aspect of the Christ story. What about Christ providing a model through his love to all humankind, rich or poor, male or female and morally righteous or fallen? What about the Gospel of the all-forgiving Lord which was quite different than the image of God in the Old Testament? What about his command to the flock to "love thy neighbor"?  

According to Bishop Jenky, it was the miraculous reanimation of the flesh of Jesus which is "the only one basic reason why Christianity exists."

It must have been quite baffling to hear a bishop make such a statement. But there was quite a bit more in store for the congregation.

About three-quarters of the way into the lecture, the bishop’s remarks took an even more surprising turn. He used the pulpit to attack the president’s policies on healthcare by telling his parishioners:

Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services, and health care.

In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama – with his radical, pro abortion and extreme secularist agenda, now seems intent on following a similar path.

Now things have come to such a pass in America that this is a battle that we could lose, but before the awesome judgement seat of Almighty God this is not a war where any believing Catholic may remain neutral.

This fall, every practicing Catholic must vote, and must vote their Catholic consciences, or by the following fall our Catholic schools, our Catholic hospitals, our Catholic Newman Centers, all our public ministries -- only excepting our church buildings – could easily be shut down. Because no Catholic institution, under any circumstance, can ever cooperate with the intrinsic evil of killing innocent human life in the womb.

Many across the country criticized these provocative remarks. By attempting to equate Obama to both Hitler and Stalin, Jenky tried to stir up public fears with visions of rampant fascism and outlandish notions of  shutting down of the Catholic Church. It was clear that Bishop Jenky was diving into uncharted waters. 
At that time , it sparked me to investigate the Church’s more recent history with fascism. (It was a rewarding investigation.)

A Church Without a Flock?

In point of fact, as far as a so-called Catholic conscience goes, according a survey by the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute, most U.S. Catholics ( 60 percent) think the church should focus more on social justice and helping the poor, even if it means focusing less on issues like abortion. 

And there's still worse news for Jenky.

A survey in September found that President Barack Obama holds a 54%-39% advantage over Mitt Romney among Catholics- despite the bishop's appeals.

Hurricane Sandy Brings an October Surprise

by Nomad

I
n a rather surprising show of solidarity, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who has been bashing President Obama for the last year on his lack of leadership- did an about-face after his state was devastated by Hurricane Sandy. 

According to CBSNews

Christie called the level of cooperation between the local, state and federal governments "excellent" and praised President Obama's involvement. "I was on the phone for the third time yesterday, last night, with the president of the United States. He called me at midnight last night as he was seeing reports," he said before adding that President Obama accelerated the designation of New Jersey as a major disaster area "without the usual red tape."

"The cooperation has been great with FEMA here on the ground and the cooperation from the president of the United States has been outstanding. He deserves great credit," Christie added.

Meanwhile Jay Carney, spokesman for the White House, gave this assessment of the relief efforts:

"When disaster strikes, Americans suffer -- not Democrats, not independents, not Republicans -- Americans suffer. And then we come together and put politics aside to make sure that those Americans get the assistance that they need."

With a week left before the election, Obama  canceled campaign trips planned for Tuesday and Wednesday to stay in Washington and supervise storm recovery. On Wednesday, Obama is scheduled to visit New Jersey, and is expected to return to campaigning on Thursday.

The "Milk Before Meat" Candidate: Why Romney Doesn’t Deserve Your Vote

by Nomad

The Truth about LyingMost us as children were taught that lying was wrong. There was never any need to inquire too deeply. It just was. Why? Because I said so. End of discussion.

Later, things started getting complicated. Some lies were more acceptable than others- white lies, for example, though, in fact, all of them were still wrong. Technically.

Around the time of high school, that great petri dish for social behavior- most of us simply stopped asking this basic question and accepted lying a part of the human condition. Get over it.
Throughout the long history of philosophy the subject of deception has been a hot topic. Immanuel Kant was pretty categorical. Lying, he said, was always unethical. To be human means having the ability to be rational and to make own choices. It gave a sense of dignity to humanity. A life with any rational choice was no life for a self-respecting human being.
Bear with me.

Mitt Romney and the Eye of the Needle

Check out this excerpt from one of the (hundred) debates during the Republican primaries. 

That was an interesting reaction, wasn't it? Romney stammers his answer and has to think fast before he commits his soul to the fiery furnace. As Anderson Cooper gives him a second chance to clarify, Romney hesitates and finally- to smattering of applause- takes the plunge. 

(In an earlier post, we pointed out how Romney has violated repeatedly his own Mormon code forbidding lying in every form. He was quite willing in that case to break the tenets of that faith to the cost of his salvation.)

Mitt Romney’s Trickle -Down Government Nonsense

by Nomad

Mitt Romney's use of a new catch-phrase "trickle-down" government deserves a closer look. What does he mean? And why are his ideas about "trickle-down" downright wrong.

Trickle-Down
Maybe you heard it too. At first, I thought I had mis-heard what he had said. 

Near the end of last debate we heard Mitt Romney say:

This is the way we're going to create jobs in this country. It's not by trickle-down government, saying we're going to take more money from people and hire more government workers, raise more taxes, put in place more regulations. Trickle-down government has never worked here, has never worked anywhere.

In case you missed it, “trickle-down government” is a new catch-phrase that Romney has deploying at every possible occasion. Here’s another example in the first debate:

The president has a view very similar to the view he had when he ran four years, that a bigger government, spending more, taxing more, regulating more — if you will, trickle-down government — would work.

In one speech in Colorado, he clearly put pedal to metal and came out chattering like a manic shopping channel salesman:

”I saw the president’s vision as trickle-down government, and I don’t think that’s what America believes in….We have very two different courses for America – trickle-down government or prosperity through freedom. And trickle-down government that the president proposes is one where he will raise taxes on small business….

“We’re going to have a stronger America with more jobs, rising incomes, moderated prices – that’s a very different path than one with trickle-down government…Under trickle-down government, you have the president saying – well, you remember in his last campaign, that under his policies of energy, that prices of energy would necessarily skyrocket…

“The Congressional Budget Office says that by the end of a four-year period, if he were to be re-elected, trickle-down government would lead to a setting where we would have $20 trillion in debt…Trickle-down government will not create the jobs Americans need.Trickle-down government will not bring down the cost of energy. Trickle-down government will not allow incomes to rise…”

Well, the reasons for this rhetorical strategy are clear. By now most intelligent voters have caught on to the fact that the whole trickle- down theory has been pretty thoroughly discredited. Most people have understood that rewarding the super wealthy has not led to an increase in jobs. In fact, much of the money derived from the Bush tax cuts was apparently stowed away in offshore accounts in the Cayman islands or in Swiss banks. If the trickle-down theory actually worked, then we would have seen some sign of its success after ten years. 

So Romney’s idea? Continue with the same policy but re-frame the debate by changing the catch-phrases. Now it’s trickle-down government. 

"Binders Full of Women": Shredding Mitt's Myth

by Nomad

C

ourtesy of The Atlantic, this photograph from last night's 90-minute debate at Hofstra University in Hemptstead, N.Y seems to capture the inner truth about the candidates.

One exchange during the debate which emerged as an online talking point was Romney's remark on hiring women. 

Here's is a transcript of that segment:

CROWLEY: Governor Romney, pay equity for women?

ROMNEY: Thank you. An important topic, and one which I learned a great deal about, particularly as I was serving as governor of my state, because I had the chance to pull together a cabinet and all the applicants seemed to be men.

And I -- and I went to my staff, and I said, "How come all the people for these jobs are -- are all men." They said, "Well, these are the people that have the qualifications." And I said, "Well, gosh, can't we -- can't we find some -- some women that are also qualified?"

And -- and so we -- we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet.

I went to a number of women's groups and said, "Can you help us find folks," and they brought us whole binders full of women.

I was proud of the fact that after I staffed my Cabinet and my senior staff, that the University of New York in Albany did a survey of all 50 states, and concluded that mine had more women in senior leadership positions than any other state in America. Now one of the reasons I was able to get so many good women to be part of that team was because of our recruiting effort.

His statement seems to contradict his already foggy stand on Affirmative Action. After all, why is hiring from a pre-selected category any different? How is a binder full of women any different than hiring from a binder full of blacks or a binder full of Hispanics? His statement doesn't make sense because, as we shall see, it is based on a misrepresentation of the facts.

Romney's Stolen Line: A Cuban-American PR Disaster

by Nomad

When it comes to foreign policy, Romney has had more than his share of missteps- even before he began this campaign. Back in the 2008 presidential race, for example, he accidentally caused a public relations nightmare with Cuban-Americans. 

In March 2007, while speaking in Miami, Romney made a play for the Latino vote, telling his audience:

“Hugo Chavez has tried to steal an inspiring phrase. Excuse me for my pronunciation: ‘Patria o muerte, venceremos.’ It does not belong to him, it belongs to a free Cuba.’”

That phrase means ‘Fatherland Or Death, We Shall Overcome.” Obviously somebody thought Romney could take a page from the Kennedy playbook and speak as the natives do. When Kennedy mangled German, it somehow added to the charm. That an American president would make an attempt to speak their language saying, literally, I am one with you.” It's pretty old schtick but effective when it goes right. 

In Romney’s case, it all went ..not right. By that I mean, it went horribly wrong. 

NATO: A Closer Look at Mitt Romney’s Two Percent Solution

by Nomad

A

s any businessman or lawyer will confirm, the art of deception often involves things are not said, rather than the things that are actually specified. Mitt Romney's recent foreign policy speech the other day, entitled "The Mantle of Leadership, delivered at  Virginia Military Institute, definitely fits this profile. 

Here's an interesting statement from that speech.

And I will call on our NATO allies to keep the greatest military alliance in history strong by honoring their commitment to each devote 2 percent of their GDP to security spending. Today, only 3 of the 28 NATO nations meet this benchmark.

Compared to both the United Kingdom and the United States, the rest of the NATO-member countries spend noticeably less of their GDP on defense. Therein lies the Republican complaint. According to a journalist for CQ Press:

European NATO members also spend a smaller percentage of their income on defense than the United States. Although under NATO rules all members vow to spend at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product (GDP) on defense, most European members now treat the 2 percent minimum as a ceiling instead, spending about 1.4 percent of their GDPs on defense. The United States spends about 4 percent of its GDP on defense.

American critics of NATO say that with a productive population of 445 million and a combined GDP of about $11 trillion, Europeans can afford to look after themselves militarily. But by spending less on defense — and refusing to pool their resources on most joint projects — the Europeans create resentment across the Atlantic about the unfair financial burden borne by the United States. The situation also undermines efforts to create a common defense policy within the military organization.

This has been an ongoing gripe by the Republican warhawks since the Bush administration. Certainly they have a point. Michael Cohen, writing for The Century Foundation, a progressive non-partisan think tank, points out:

Why should the United States be responsible for underwriting European security (and in turn the European welfare state), especially when European countries face not a single legitimate military threat to their well-being? Moreover, if Europeans don't think it's important enough to spend their own money on their own security, why should America? Now granted, the Europeans are a little short on cash these days, but then so is the United States. But of course as the House of Representatives reminded us recently—as they eviscerated key social safety net programs to restore cuts made to the defense budget—you can't put a price tag on a huge American military that does little to keep America safe and underwrites the security of other countries.

As unfair as the situation appears to be to some Americans, it cannot be overstated that NATO is not an American organization. Although the United States comprises the largest military force within the organization, NATO is voluntary organization, a working alliance of many nations, all with shared interests, all of them treaty-bound for mutual defense. It's not a company. If you own 51% of the hardware, you still don't have controlling shares or anything like that. 

Presidentially-Unfit Mitt Romney’s Loose Talk about Syria

by Nomad

W

hen it comes to foreign policy, Republican nominee Mitt Romney gives every indication that, as a leader of the nation, he would prove to be a full-scale ("un-mitt-agated"?) diplomatic disaster.
All of the warnings signs are already apparent.

Take this example. In July of this year, The Washington Post reported:

Appearing via video at the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s annual meeting Saturday morning, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (R) delivered a speech that hinged on social issues but also focused in on what remains the top issue in the presidential election — the economy.

However, that subject seems to have been a little too boring for the members of the Christian Right organization.

And to the third question — “How would Romney strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship?” — Romney had a quip at the ready.

“Basically, I think you could just look at the things the president has done and do the opposite,” he said to laughter.

Nothing striking about that remark; it is pure Romney- an appeal to the sense of Christian Right’s disgust that Obama is actually their president. However, in ad-libbing, the candidate also stated this:

He added that he would “be leading in Syria by encouraging our friends there like the Turks and the Saudis to provide weapons to the insurgents.”

This casual, (some would call it reckless) remark says a lot about the manner in which Romney as president would conduct foreign policy. 

Musical Sanity Break- Under Pressure

This Musical Sanity Break- UNDER PRESSURE, by David Bowie and Queen- is dedicated to the upcoming debate between Barack Obama, the 44th and current President of the United States and Mitt Romney, Republican candidate and former governor of Massachusetts.

Romney, whose campaign has largely become a series of missteps, is banking his hopes for winning the election on his performance at the debates. It is quite a gamble when you look at all of his gaffes and the possibility that he could fail under the stress is, indeed, high. On the other hand, Obama has repeatedly shown that he is able to maintain his poise when challenged. So it should be interesting.

This 1981 song is one of my favorites, by the way. For a popular song, the lyrics are pretty impressive. 

Why can't we give ourselves just one more chance?

Why can't we give love just one more chance?

'Cause love's such an old fashioned word

And love dares you to care for

The people on the edge of the night

And loves dares you to change our way of

Caring about ourselves

This is our last dance

This is our last dance

This is ourselves... 

under pressure.

Unions and Citizens United: What Romney Doesn't Want You to Know

by Nomad

I

n a desperate attempt to find some issue that he can talk about- apart from foreign policy, Medicare,  gay marriage, social security, health care, tax reform or any of the other subjects he considers "political landmines"-  candidate Mitt Romney has selected an easy punching bag- teacher unions. 

Last week, Romney recently made clear his contempt for both teachers and for free speech at a roundtable discussion. He began to lecture the attendees with his opinions on teachers unions and the voucher system. When one member of the group offered her opinions on the subject, he silenced her with the imperious statement “‘I didn’t ask you a question." 
This was a monologue, not a dialogue. This conversation went one way only.

Yesterday while attempting to take another shot at teachers unions he, sadly, revealed his complete ignorance (or his hypocrisy) on one of the most important and damaging court decisions of our times.

(CBS News) Republican nominee Mitt Romney said Tuesday that Democratic politicians have a conflict of interest in dealing with teacher unions because the unions contribute so heavily to their campaigns. He suggested that money should somehow be diverted or cut off, although he did not offer details.

The bigger problem, Romney said, is that "the person sitting across the table from them should not have received the largest campaign contribution from the teachers union themselves ... [It's] an extraordinary conflict of interest and something that should be addressed."

He later added that "we simply can't have" elected officials who have received large contributions from teachers sitting across from them at the bargaining table "supposedly" to represent the interests of children. "I think it's a mistake," Romney said. "I think we have to get the money out of the teachers unions going into campaigns. It's the wrong way for us to go. We've got to separate that."

There’s a very good reason why Romney should feel embarrassed to have such a remark. He appears uneducated to the full scope of the 2010 Citizens United decision. 

The Bain-Fisher Effect: When Romney Visited Marshalltown, Iowa

by Nomad

I

n the clip below from a recent interview for a local Iowa radio station, we hear Romney doing what Romney likes best- talking about Romney and his love for the common people. He talks about his familiarity with the area, throwing in a lot of famous local landmarks to improve an illusion of sincerity and personal connection. 

More interestingly, he explains to the DJ how he himself once worked in Marshalltown, Iowa as a consultant. He mentions that he worked with a company called Fisher Controls.

http://bit.ly/PHMmfj

So I decided to take a moment to look into the history of Fisher Controls. 

From Father to Son: A Look Back at George W. Romney

by Nomad

I wanted to share some excerpts from a speech by Romney. Not Mitt Romney, the Republican candidate, but by his father, George Romney, who was at that time the president of American Motors, soon to be the governor of Michigan.

The speech was given as part of the annual address to male students at Brigham Young University on  November 1961.

In this speech, George Romney touched upon many themes in the speech, including his faith and how much faith in God played an important role in his life and his philosophy. 

His reflections on the American system show Romney to have been a careful observer. Like a lot of liberals today, he saw America as an unfinished experiment and keeping the status quo was not one of George Romney’s principles. 

Long ago I became convinced that very few of us really understand America. Very few of us have really thought through the fundamental things about the American system. I think we are too much inclined to take it for granted that the American Revolution has been completed, that we have arrived, that we have it made. We haven't. The American Revolution is in its very early stages. This is true politically, it is true economically, it is true socially, it is true religiously. And it is going to take some nonconformists in America to jolt America out of its lethargy and its smugness.

The One Percent would rather..

Why The GOP Can't Be Trusted with Foreign Policy 1/3

  by Nomad

In this three-part series we take a look back at the evidence in the case against the Republican attitude on foreign policy. We begin with John McCain who seems to have an unfailing record of being dangerously wrong on almost every pronouncement he has made about foreign relations.

Part 1- McCain’s Speech in Tampa

Lost in Paul Ryan’s flagrant dishonesty and Romney’s sticky-gooey sing-song speech, the incoherent silliness of Clint’s burlesque with an empty chair, there was an appearance that might have gone unnoticed at the Republican convention.

His was a familiar face- a bit too familiar, actually: Arizona senator and 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Whoever decided that McCain’s appearance at the convention would enhance Mitt Romney’s paltry foreign policy credentials should probably defect to the Obama campaign before somebody catches on. 

Has Fox News Given the Big Kiss-Off to Sarah Palin?

  by Nomad

I've often wondered what bottom would look like when Sarah Palin hit it Since being catapulted onto the national stage, even then it was clear that Palin- an utter slave to her own ambitions- was in over her head. 

Lately Palin's career has been a series of headlong tumbles and public pratfalls. 

Even worse- for Sarah, at least- since her decision not to run, her strident voice has faded into the hallelujahs and amens of the Romney nomination at this week's convention.

Now it appears she has hit another pointy ledge in what seems to be a very deep, very dark pit.