Hmm. Lemme get this straight. It’s an election year and the economy is tanking, gas is up, jobs are down, and Bush has no power?

Sounds to me like they want Obama to win. They sure as hell don’t want McCain. What does that tell you about who OBAMA REALLY IS?

think people

I have done the numbers on Obama. HOLY CRAP ! Same with Clinton…..

They left McCain for dead. What kind of *wind* picked McCain up and carried him to the nomination? It wasn’t party leadership, that’s for sure. They want him gone. That means, I can support only McCain. I am a liberal dem, in no way in support of Clinton or Obama. But, the man the repubs hate is your only choice. I have seen tons of conservative discussion boards and lists touting a vote for Obama. Gee Wiz, that’s odd since he *appears* to be very anti Bush and war, and greed, and yadda yadda.

Bet on it.

Mitt’s campaign money comes from outsourcing jobs, saddling companies with debt they can’t repay and laying off thousands of workers?

Mitt Romney – Troubles Ahead Because of Troubles Behind – Part 1One of the problems that lies ahead of Romney is what lies behind that fortune. He hasn’t run a “corner store” or a company that manufactures things or sells things or even provided a service. He ran Bain Capital, a leveraged buyout firm. Think the movie Wall Street and Gordon Gecko.This from a New York Times Article.

“Mitt ran a private equity firm, not a cement company,” said Eric A. Kriss, a former Bain Capital partner. “He was not a businessman in the sense of running a company,” Mr. Kriss said, adding, “He was a great presenter, a great spokesman and a great salesman.”

Mr. Romney learned the perils of campaigning on his business career in his first run for office, when accusations that Bain Capital had fired union workers at an Indiana company it controlled derailed his effort to unseat Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a Democrat, in 1994. “Basically, he cut our throats,” a laid-off worker said in a commercial attacking Mr. Romney.

Bain and its co-investors extracted special payments of over $100 million from each company, enabling Bain to make a healthy profit even before re-selling the businesses — a practice known as “getting back your bait.” Lenders say Bain is one of the firms that has taken the most in such payments, which companies usually make by taking on additional debt.

So when Mitt Romney campaigns on money borrowed from his personal fortune, let’s rememeber and remind others where that money came from. It came from outsourcing jobs, saddling companies with debt they could never repay and laying off thousands of workers.

Romney is considered a failure on the MA economy by conservatives.

As if this was really about the economy. ITS NOT. It’s about Zion.  And you don’t want to know what they have planned in order to make their dreams come true.

ROMNEY’S ECONOMIC RECORD IN MASSACHUSETTS: “ONE OF THE WORST IN THE COUNTRY”“We really haven’t had a turnaround … We’re trailing the nation in job growth. Our job growth has been anemic.” — Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President Michael Widmer

Under Romney, Massachusetts’ Economic Performance Was “Weak … One Of The Worst In The Country”

 “As Mitt Romney pursues his bid for the presidency, his record as Massachusetts governor will come under scrutiny, including how the state’s economy performed during his administration. Our analysis reveals a weak comparative economic performance of the state over the Romney years, one of the worst in the country.” (Andrew Sum and Joseph McLaughlin, Op-Ed, “Romney’s Economic Record,” The Boston Globe, 7/29/07)

· Cato Institute Graded Romney A “C” For His Fiscal Performance As Governor. (Cato Institute Website,, Accessed 1/21/07)

Under Romney, Massachusetts’ Job Growth Was “Anemic,” Ranked Third-Worst In The Country

Under Romney, “On All Key Labor Market Measures, The State Not Only Lagged Behind The Country As A Whole, But Often Ranked At Or Near The Bottom Of The State Distribution.” “On all key labor market measures, the state not only lagged behind the country as a whole, but often ranked at or near the bottom of the state distribution. Formal payroll employment in the state in 2006 was still 16,000 or 0.5 percent below its average level in 2002, the year immediately prior to the start of the Romney administration. Massachusetts ranked third lowest on this key job generation measure and would have ranked second lowest if Hurricane Katrina had not devastated the Louisiana economy.” (Andrew Sum and Joseph McLaughlin, Op-Ed, “Romney’s Economic Record,” The Boston Globe, 7/29/07)

· Job Growth Under Romney “Anemic.” “‘When he talks about a turnaround, we really haven’t had a turnaround,’ said Michael J. Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, a nonpartisan organization that analyzes state economic policies. “We had a temporary fiscal respite. But we’re trailing the nation in job growth. Our job growth has been anemic.” (Pam Belluck, “Romney Candidacy Puts Massachusetts Economy In Spotlight,” The New York Times, 3/16/07)

Under Romney, Massachusetts’ Manufacturing Jobs Declined At Double The National Rate — Third Worst Record In The Country

Under Romney, Massachusetts Manufacturing Job Declined By More Than 14 Percent — Double The National Rate. “Manufacturing payroll employment throughout the nation declined by nearly 1.1 million or 7 percent between 2002 and 2006, but in Massachusetts it declined by more than 14 percent, the third worst record in the country.” (Andrew Sum and Joseph McLaughlin, Op-Ed, “Romney’s Economic Record,” The Boston Globe, 7/29/07)

Under Romney, Taxes In Massachusetts Increased More Than $700 Million Per Year

Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation: More Than $700 Million Per Year In Increased Taxes And Fees Under Romney. “Fees and taxes have increased more than $700 million a year under Governor Mitt Romney and Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, a leading budget specialist said yesterday. Michael J. Widmer – president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, which closely tracks state finances – said the state has raised roughly $740 million to $750 million per year by increasing fees and corporate taxes gained from what the Romney administration describes as ‘closing loopholes.’” (Brian Mooney, “Analyst Puts Increase In Fees, Taxes At $700m,” The Boston Globe, 9/27/06)

· “[R]omney … Approved Hundreds Of Millions In Higher Fees And Fines Including Raising The Cost Of Getting A Marriage License, Filing A Court Case, Buying A House Or Renewing A Drivers License.” (Steve LeBlanc, “Romney, In Change Of Heart, Signs No-New-Taxes Pledge,” The Associated Press, 1/5/07)

· “A 2003 Survey Of States By The National Conference Of State Legislatures Found Massachusetts Imposed At Least $501.5 Million In Fee Hikes, Far More Than Any Other State In The Nation That Year.” (Steve LeBlanc, “Romney, In Change Of Heart, Signs No-New-Taxes Pledge,” The Associated Press, 1/5/07)

· Cato Institute: Romney’s Rhetoric On Taxes “Mostly A Myth.” “[R]omney will likely also be eager to push the message that he was a governor who stood by a no-new-taxes pledge. That’s mostly a myth. His first budget included no general tax increases but did include a $500 million increase in various fees. He later proposed $140 in business tax hikes through the closing of ‘loopholes’ in the tax code.” (Stephen Slivinski, “Fiscal Policy Report Card On America’s Governors: 2006,” Cato Institute, 2006, p. 26)

Under Romney, Massachusetts Turned Into “Taxachusetts”

The Boston Globe: Romney’s Fee Increases “May Have Enhanced [Massachusetts’] Reputation As ‘Taxachusetts.’” “This time it’s fees, not taxes. Still, Massachusetts may have enhanced its reputation as ‘Taxachusetts.’ A survey of states grappling with spending crises has found that Massachusetts imposed more fee hikes than any other state in the nation this year — at least $500 million. Governor Mitt Romney and the Legislature, faced with a multibillion dollar shortfall, made it more expensive to get a marriage license or a divorce, file a court case, buy a house, renew a driver’s license, or tap into a host of other state services.” (Rick Klein, “Mass. Is Called No. 1 In Fee Hikes,” The Boston Globe, 7/24/03)

Under Romney, Who Refused To Endorse Bush Tax Cuts, Higher Taxes Eliminated Benefits Of Bush Tax Cuts

Boston Herald: Romney “Refused To Take A Position On Bush’s Massive, 10-Year Tax Cut Plan.” “[R]omney spoke at the 10th annual legislative conference organized by U.S. Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Lowell) and met with the Massachusetts delegation. … Congressional sources said that a point of contention arose when Romney refused to take a position on Bush’s massive, 10-year tax cut plan. Lawmakers told him that the state is unlikely to get the additional homeland security funds they and the governor are requesting because the money will go to the tax cut. But Romney would not discuss the matter, sources said.” (Noelle Straub, “Romney Talks Policy With Bush Staffers, Mass. Delegation,” The Boston Herald, 4/11/03)

Free-Market Beacon Hill Institute: Romney’s Fee Increases “Not Only Diminish, But, For Some People, Even Eliminate” The Benefits Massachusetts Residents Received From President Bush’s 2003 Tax Cuts. “If the Bush tax cuts revive the stalling economy they will do so in spite of the large fee increases levied by states across the U.S. with Massachusetts leading the way. If anything, these state fee increases not only diminish, but, for some people, even eliminate, the tax cuts passed by Congress and signed by the President.” (Christopher Boyd, “Fees Put A Crimp On Tax Cuts,” Beacon Hill Institute’s NewsLink, Vol. 8, No. 1, Fall 2003)

Under Romney, Massachusetts’ State Business Tax Climate Ranking Fell 11 Spots

According To The Tax Foundation, Massachusetts State Business Tax Climate Ranking Fell 11 Spots, From 26 In 2003 To 37 In 2007. (Tax Foundation, “State Business Tax Climate Index Rankings,”, 1/12/08)

Under Romney, Massachusetts’ State Spending Increased More Than $5 Billion In Three Years

State Spending Increased By More Than $5 Billion (24%) In Three Years Following Romney’s First Budget, An Annual Increase Of 8%. Total FY2007 spending is projected by the state to reach roughly $26.85 billion, an increase of 24.2% from the roughly $21.6 billion spent in FY04, Romney’s first full fiscal year in office. (State Of Massachusetts Website, “Historical Spending,”, 4/4/07)

Under Romney, Hundreds Of Thousands Of People Left Massachusetts

Under Romney, Over 200,000 People Left Massachusetts — 3.5 Percent Of State’s Population – Ranking Second-Highest In Country In Out-Migration. “Between July 2002 and July 2006, the US Census Bureau estimated that 222,000 more residents left Massachusetts for other states than came here to live. This high level of net domestic out-migration was equivalent to 3.5 percent of the state’s population, the third highest rate of population loss in the country. Excluding the population displacement effects of Hurricane Katrina on Louisiana, Massachusetts would have ranked second highest on this measure.” (Andrew Sum and Joseph McLaughlin, Op-Ed, “Romney’s Economic Record,” The Boston Globe, 7/29/07)

· Under Romney, Massachusetts Was “A National Leader In Exporting Our Population.” (Andrew Sum and Joseph McLaughlin, Op-Ed, “Romney’s Economic Record,” The Boston Globe, 7/29/07)

Under Romney, Major Employers Left Massachusetts

“While Mr. CEO Was Governor, Major Employers Such As Gillette, Hancock, Fleet, Reebok Were Bought By Out-Of-Town Goliaths.” “[Romney] bragged as CEO he’d bring corporations and jobs to Massachusetts and belittled Shannon O’Brien for not knowing what he knew. While Mr. CEO was governor, major employers such as Gillette, Hancock, Fleet, Reebok were bought by out-of-town goliaths.” (Dan Payne, Op-Ed, “Memo To Candidates For Governor, Re: Debate,” The Boston Globe, 5/18/06)

Boston Herald: “No Longer Can Boston Be Called A True Corporate-Headquarters Town. … The Reason: There Are Simply Too Few Of Those Jobs Around. And Too Few Large Companies.” “That’s it. Yesterday’s announcement that Adidas is buying Reebok – after a slew of other takeovers of major Hub-area public corporations – marks a ‘paradigm shift’ in Boston’s historic economic profile and the very nature of its work force, economists and business leaders agree. No longer can Boston be called a true corporate-headquarters town. No longer is it as attractive a place for many university graduates to stay if they aspire to middle-management and top-echelon executive jobs – from human resources to accounting positions – within major public corporations. The reason: There are simply too few of those jobs around. And too few large companies.” (Jay Fitzgerald, “Paradigm Shift For Boston’s Economy,” Boston Herald, 8/4/05)

For More On Mitt Romney’s Economic Failure In MA , His Lies, His Corruption, His Inability to be Electable against the Democrats Please Visit Our Official Site For These Important Articles.

Shared with the MV08 Bloggers at
Ali Akbar,AzaMatterofact, AzaMatteroPrinciple, Blogs4McCain, BroadSideoftheBarn, ElectionNightHQ, Hoosiers4McCain, Iowa4McCain, McCain Blogettes, McCain States, McCain Talk, McCainVictory08, McCain Campaign Blog, Metaxupolis, My McCain Blog, NH4McCain, NJ4McCain, Pardon My French, Partisan American, PoliticoMafioso, Purple People Vote, Reality Bytes, Respectfully Republican, Stand Up For McCain>The Mad Irishman, The McCain Times, Vote McCain, With Both Hands, Porter County Politics, But I am a Liberal.Blue and New, Brainster, California Thoughts and Dreams, College Kid for McCain, McCain Monitor, Empty Rhetoric, Andrew Jones for America, JohnnyMillerBlog, Keystone for Victory, Michigan4McCain, Why McCain, and Wisconsin4McCain.


DAVID BROOKS: Outstanding piece on why Romney can’t win general election.

“The PowerPoint mentality always fails to anticipate something. It always yields unintended consequences.What Romney failed to anticipate is this: In turning himself into an old-fashioned, orthodox Republican, he has made himself unelectable in the fall. When you look inside his numbers, you see tremendous weaknesses.”

“The leaders of the Republican coalition know Romney will lose. But some would rather remain in control of a party that loses than lose control of a party that wins. Others haven’t yet suffered the agony of defeat, and so are not yet emotionally ready for the trauma of transformation. Others still simply don’t know which way to turn. ”

WALL STREET JOURNAL: McCain most electable

 As Primary Moves Along, Republican Voters Face Question of Who Can WinBy Alex Frangos And Elizabeth Holmes
The Wall Street Journal
January 25, 2008

The leading Republican presidential candidates all claim to be the best-suited to overcome the Democratic tide expected in the general election. But opinion polls clearly favor Arizona Sen. John McCain in that regard.

In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, 37% of respondents said Mr. McCain has the best chance to win in November against the Democrats. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney was far back in second, with 16%, followed closely by former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani at 15% and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee at 12%. Those results are mirrored in other polls.

I’m certain the tanking of the economy wasn’t intentional. Why would someone manipulate financial markets?

Hmmm, Foreclosures soared 75% in 2007 – the year the elections begin. 75%. Would that create a economic downturn just in time for – hmmm, lets see…..who is the Economic Guy ??? McCain? Huck? Fred? Obama? Clintoness? What if it gets really really worse? Then, we stop talking about EVERYTHING else. And look how very fast we are bailing people out. Wow, Country Wide lucked out with that buyout by Bank of A. I doubt that was planned in advance. They aren’t that evil. Why do I smell sulfer?  Maybe someone is cooking something.
Posted: 02:52 PM ET
LONDON (CNN) — European leaders have agreed that there is a pressing need for more transparency and a better early warning system for the global economy, Prime Minister Gordon Brown told reporters Tuesday after meeting with the leaders of France, Italy and the European Community.


January 29th, 2008
Posted: 05:03 AM ET
(CNN) — The number of foreclosures soared in 2007, with 405,000
households losing their home, according to a report released Tuesday.

Hemmorrhaging $2 Billion a week in Iraq as our economy tanks.

The President’s plan—tax breaks for corporations and rebate checks for the well-off—isn’t just morally wrong. It’s based on discredited “trickle down” theories and it won’t work.1

But there’s tremendous pressure on Democrats to accept the President’s priorities just to get something passed. Negotiations are happening right now, and Congress needs to hear from you right away!

We need to demand a progressive stimulus package—one that puts money into the hands of people who are feeling the squeeze (who, incidentally, will spend it fastest). One that funds public infrastructure projects that will create new jobs, make our economy more competitive, and reduce our dependence on oil. One that will actually solve the problem.

Can you sign our petition to Congress? Clicking here will add your name:

The petition reads: “Congress must quickly pass a stimulus package that helps those who need it the most and will spend it the fastest. And it should include public investments that will create jobs and move us toward a 21st century, clean energy economy.”

A leading economist at NYU says “We’re facing the risk of a systemic financial crisis.”2 The mortgage, credit card, and auto loan industries are all in trouble. The stock market is tanking as we speak. On top of all that, we’re hemorrhaging $2 billion a week in Iraq.3

The “Iraq Recession” is here.

Yet Bush’s proposal is just another kind of trickle-down economics. His plan gives little or no help to people who make less than $40,000 a year, and families of four making less than $24,950 would get nothing—even though those are the very folks who would spend a little extra cash in their pockets.

According to a top economic think tank, the Republican plan would do nothing to help about 65 million Americans. “This approach fails on two counts. It omits or partly omits those who need the help. And it omits the tens of millions of people who are living paycheck to paycheck and who would be most likely to quickly spend every dollar they can get.”4

Bush’s own Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke testified before Congress that “putting money into the hands of households and firms that would spend it in the near term” would be more effective than other short-term fixes or tax rebates for the wealthy.5

We need to get help into the hands of those who need it. That means making sure tax rebates go to working people, not millionaires, extending unemployment benefits, sending money to the states so they don’t have to cut back programs for average people, and fully funding energy assistance programs for the low-income families struggling to heat their homes as oil prices rise.6

And, with skyrocketing oil prices driving the recession, we need public infrastructure investments that create jobs in the short-term, and move us toward a 21st century, clean energy economy in the long-term. We should invest in energy efficiency, mass transit, and a Clean Energy Corps, putting hundreds of thousands of people to work rebuilding our economy.

And of course, we need to end the war that has already cost us $1 trillion.

This economic stimulus package will cost about $150 billion. Just think what we could do if all that money was invested in big, smart, sustainable ways. Or we could just try the same old, failed, trickle-down economics.

Congress is moving fast, and will make a decision as early as this week about what the plan will include. Clicking here will add your name to our emergency petition:

Thank you for all you do.

–Noah, Eli, Wes, Justin, and the Political Action Team
  Tuesday, January 22nd, 2008


1. “Administration Stimulus Plan Fails Tests for Achieving Most Effective Stimulus, Gives Less Favorable Treatment to Families Under $40,000,” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, January 18, 2008.

2. “No Quick Fix to Downturn,” New York Times, January 13, 2008.

3. “Cost of War Nearly $2 Billion a Week,” Boston Globe, September 28, 2006.

4.”Tax Rebate or Payment? A Policy Debate Begins,” New York Times, January 20, 2008.

5. “Bush, Bernanke call for a stimulus plan,” CNN, January 17, 2008.

6. “The President’s Economic Stimulus Plan Is Only a Start,” Center for American Progress, January 18, 2008.

Support our member-driven organization: Political Action is entirely funded by our 3.2 million members. We have no corporate contributors, no foundation grants, no money from unions. Our tiny staff ensures that small contributions go a long way. If you’d like to support our work, you can give now at:

Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.

Posting again, because it has vanished off the net. How and Why the economy tanked (humor)

When the repubs stormed Bush’s Oval, and said, “W, we got worries. This Iraq thing is chappin our ass dude! You gotta do something. We can’t win the White House with Iraq on our heads. “Bush: heeheeheeheee heee hhhheee Don’t worry about it. We gotz ourselves a plan. See, we know what idiots the people are. For craps sakes, we stole 2000, we stole 2004, and we STILL have Deibold. Heeeheeeh eehehehhhehhheeeee. Renquist was brilliant. I ain’t gonna let him down. Gore gonna get his prize….so everybody’s happy.
So here’s the deal. By the time 2008 rolls around, you don’t gotta worry about it because we’ll surge right before that and fix it some. Lipstick on a pig. They’ll buy it. Specially my churchy folk. I just keep tellin em God is in my corner, and it’s all good. McCain will go along with that, and he’ll get out in front on that, cuz he wants to win the big un in 2008. He aint’ gonna though, cuz the cape don’t fit him. Heeeheeehhh heehehhheheeee.

Also, we got people all set up and there gonna start givin those broke ass MF’s some high interest loans they won’t be able to pay back. These guys over at Countrywide gonna hand those loans out like candy. Those poor smellin folk will come running for some of Daddy’s pork and they’ll suck on that for about 2 years, maybe 3, and then BAM, they can’t pay it back cuz we raise the interest on those fools and they get stuck like a rattler in a sticky bush. We got some good advice from the Katrina people. We know what we’re doin.


Then, our friends at Bank of America gonna swoop in and buy it up from Countrywide. Otherwise, countrywide wouldn’t a done the deal. So, that’s covered. So, buy the time 2008 comes, those guys in Iraq will be happy just to see some help coming. We’ll tell the insurgents to cool it, just until November 11, then they can go back to what thay’s doin before that. Heeeheeehhheeeeeh heeehehehe.

Anyways, so you got nothing to worry about. We got all those Dems phones and offices tapped. They ain’t gonna say anything, and so, that’s it. We got it locked up like a chastity belt. No one’s gettin in fellas. Don’t worry. Just play along. And by about August, or September, will do something really good like catch Osama, then it’s done. We win. Osama says he’s cleared his schedule. He just needs the last details when we’re ready. And if he changes his mind, we’ll just nuke somethin around here, and call it a war. We;ll call it ARMAGEDDON. People love that shit. CNN can do some planning on that if I asks em.


So, you ain’t gonna half ta talk about Iraq. The stock market’s gonna tank. Ya better get your lists before that happens, and then it’s 24/7 RECESSION BABY – yahoooooooo !!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Oh shit, I gotta go. I gotta go over and book the Libary for the speech Mitt is gonna be makin. Make yourself at home guys. Sniff the sofas. Pour yerself some Remy. Relax, CNN’s on board. They story boardin some big news on how bad the economy is gettin, and they’re gonna scare the tabacco crap outta everybody. We got the Networks ready for the Writers Strike, so that damn Jay Leno don’t piss me off. MSNBC too. We got lots of help. Our big corp friends are gonna help us out to. We got it handled. Oh, and ….Fox calls me everyday laughin their ass off. We just gotta do somethin about that Oldermann fella on MSNBC. He’s a big ol texas thorn in my backside and I aim to tell him, if ya know what I mean.


Ya gotta admit, it is funny ain’t it…..heeeeheheehheeee heeeheeeehheee

(this was only done for humor – this is not a true story – as far as I know of – for sure. )

Glenn Beck, Romney Megaphone, says economy tanking.

Yes, that would be correct. Economy is tanking. That’s because it was designed to tank so Romney wouldn’t have to talk about his WAY EVIL stance on Iraq and the touble with Blackwater. And looky here, it worked. If you have yet to read my post from yesterday about how all of this *could have * happened (from a humorous perspective) then check out the post called Heeeeehhheeeeeehhheeeheheheeeee from 1/17.  I actually don’t think it posted at all, because I ALWAYS get comments on these things, and there are none. Additionally, it is no where to be seen on the net. Very unusual and very telling.

Wait- what? Bush wants tax rebate now- but my tax refund may be delayed?

Fed chairman has spoken. Eveybody at attention please. Who’s getting the new and immediate tax rebate? And why would they be offering an immediate tax rebate when they just finished saying our tax refunds would be delayed? Are they going to finance the rich’s tax rebate with the middle class tax delay? And define delay.