On The Last Word Wednesday, Lawrence O'Donnell welcomed policy wonks Jared Bernstein and Robert Reich to help him take on perhaps the two biggest policy lies that Mitt Romney has been pushing lately.
First, Bernstein, a Lean Forward contributor and former White House economist, explained in detail why Romney's claim that by repealing Obamacare he'll extend and strengthen the program is "completely upside down."
Said Bernstein:
The suggestion that by putting that $716 billion back in, Mitt Romney will extend the life of the program—its exactly the opposite. Those dollars, the $716 billion, are extra costs that are in Medicare, that are taken out in the Affordable Care Act. They are things like overpayments to private insurers, excessive reimbursement rates. When you take those out, according to that groovy guy, the Medicare Actuary, you actually extend the life of the program by eight years. And this was quite clear on all those factual rebuttals, by putting that money back in, he's actually shortening the life of the program by eight years ... so this is completely upside down.
Indeed, The New York Times reported today that according to several experts, repealing the ACA's Medicare savings, as Romney wants to do, would shorten the life of Medicare by eight years.
Bernstein went on to debunk Romney's charge that President Obama has cut seniors' benefits by $716 billion.
"Those dollars come from inefficiencies on the delivery side, nothing on the beneficiary side," he said, echoing a point that many objective observers have made. "In fact the Affordable Care Act improves the benefits of Medicare."
Then it was Reich's turn. The former Clinton administration Labor Secretary took on Romney's false—and racially incendiary—charge that President Obama has relaxed the work requirements for welfare, so that recipients can simply sit around and "pick up a check." In fact, as we've written, Obama insisted that states had to show they were putting more welfare recipients to work in order for their changes to be approved.
Said Reich:
It's exactly the opposite of what Romney has been saying ... Republicans for years have been saying we want more flexibilty at the state level for a lot of these programs. So what the president does is, he turns around he says, 'OK states, you have some more flexibility, particualrly if you're going to put more welfare recipients to work.' And then Romney turns around and he says .... the president actually ... got rid of the work requirement.' I mean nothing could be further from the truth.
So there you have it. Two crucial policy areas, and two flat-out lies from Mitt Romney. Now you have chapter and verse.
Leave a Comment:
I hope the people are not listening Romney or Ryan they going to tear this nation apart.
If they truly believe in God they must be going down the wrong path.
God wouldn't want them doing what they are doing.
I hope they wake up to what the people of this nation is going through.
The repubs unning for the white house are trying their harest to convince "themselves" that what they're saying is true. I think it's quite a bit like Reich says, the charge against the President's intention is a lie—and racially incendiary— and my reasonable sense, when it's working, says these guys are instigating something thatthey want to be able to disclaim later.
Of course, Reich doesn't back up his claim, but don't let that bother you.
dave, if you'd choose to keep up with what happens in politics on a regular basis, you would know that Reich is factually stating what happen. Rather than doubting or just making a sarcastic comment, be intelligent enough to look up the facts for yourself. That way you do not have to depend on someone else for knowledge.
Only in Washington, D.C. and in liberal think LaLa Land could one say that cutting the money paid to physicians (alreqdy to low requiring Congress to each year go through the mechanism of passing temporary legislation known as "the Doc Fix") and cutting reimbursements to hospitals and other medical outpatient institutions for medical services rendered to seniors under Medicare will improve those services and the benefits for the seniors. 25% of Medicare recepients chode Medicare Advantage policied, and option to purchase with Medicare funds and their own premium contributions private health insurance, and they all say that is the program that works best for them, as it often includes services, such as dental, vision, and and alternative treatments that Traditional Medicare does not pay for. And, as Obama so infamously promised on the passage of ObamaCare, if you like your insurance plan, you can keep it...apparently not if you are a senior, however. Add to that the infamous provision under ObamaCare of the utilization of statistically determined "best practices" commission of 15 appointed non-practicing physicians that will be drawing up the regulations in Washington, D.C. that will ration care to seniors going forward..instead of allowing the treateing physician to decide what lab test, what diagnostic procedure such as an X-ray, or a CAT Scan, or an MRI, or a course of chemo and radiation for a detected cancer, and what presecription drugs to prescribe...its all going to be reduced to a cost savings serieds of regualtion attempting to turn the art of medicine into a government proscribed practice determined by burocrats. But suppose, for a minute, that all of this nonsense does actually "save" $716 billion of Medicare Funds...if you save the money for the Medicare Trust Fund, leaving the savings in the Trust Fund would be the sensible way to extend the life of the fund...at present to have inhospital benefits going bankrupt by 2016, and all benefits to go bankrupt by 2022. But in the wierd illlogic of the LaLa Land liberals, taking those supposed savings out of the Trust Fund to fianance the gross expansion of Medicaid (which the states do not want) and to subsidize with federal money middleclass individuals higher health insurance premiums due to the fancy bells and whistles one size fits all Washington, D.C. health insurance forced on the individual state's insurance markets by ObamaCare, that will extend Medicare? Lets see, by that logic if I take out say a third of my savings account to blow on an expensive European vacation this year, that will extend my savings for another 8 years? Because it was wasteful just leaving it sit in the Trust Fund accumulating some interest? Only in Washington, D.C. blue smoke and mirrors accointing and Liberal LaLa land does taking $716 Billion out of the Medicare Trust Fund "SAVE" Medicare.
Noiw for Robert Reich, the LaLa Land economist from Berkley for heavens sake who was Labor Secretary under William Jefferson Clinton, he fought vigorously against the Republicans attempting to bring the legislation forward that put the welfare to work concept into the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families federal welfare program. In effect, if a recepient is still receiving federal taxpayers TANF benefits after two years, they must be in an approved education program or a job training program that promises to lead to work in the near forseeable future to continue receiving those benefits, as long as there is no medical barrier. Some Governors have asked for discretion in their states on just how the federal dollars are allocated in drawing up their internal Welfare Office regulations...others, mostly Democrat Governors in states with large urban areas have asked directly for discretion on relieving the TANF recepients from the requirement to be in an approved education program or a or a job training program after two years. And contrary to the legislation that was passed by the U.S. Congress in the 1990s, snd that President Clinton first vetoed, but eventually was brought to sign, that is the the law of the land. But just as Barrack Obama has made an end run around Congress that would not pass the liberals "Dream Act" giving an automatic path to citizenship and green cards to work to illegal immigrants under the age of 30 who could prove they have been in this country illegally continuously since coming here at ages under 16 years (this is at a time of 8.3% unemployment..which for some communities is more like 16% unemployment). Of course, that is being challenged in the federal court systems as being an usurpation of the powers of Congress...but it served the purpose of strengthening the President in his need for large numbers of Hispanic voters especially to go to the polls to help him in his re-election bid, which it was looking like he wasn't going to get as the effects of his failed policies on the economy have hit Hispanic communities especially hard. But in for a penny, in for a pound, and having gotten temporarily away with that, now its doing away by Presidential fiat with the work or education requirement, by allowing for the Health and Human Service Secretary to provide states with waivers that would "relax the rules" set forth in Congress's emphatic legislation, and the nebuous provision that state's would at some time in the future have to "prove" that they were actually having more people leave the TANF rolls for work than before they received their waivers and stopped requiring either education endeavors or job training endeavors after two years of being on the dole is hardly a present restriction. When will the states with "welfare to work" waivers given have to prove that without educating or job training their post two year TANF recepients more of those recepients went to work than before when they were required to get education or job training to continue past the initial two years....five years down the road, ten? And by what measure? And if the states can't prove that they have complied with that nebulous provision, what is the penalty they face? A loss of the waiver...having to repay with states tax payers dollars the ill gotten TANF benefits for their perpetual welfare recepients? Nothing in the Presidential Order speaks to that!
Robert Reich, left wingnut economist, has one and only one mantra....he believes in the government supplying with taxes taken from the "rich" and/or borrowed money stimulating the economy thru federal largess...which although it pulls resources out of the private sector, he believes will magically cause for an overall growth in the economy...and the more the govenment taxes and borrows and spends, the more growth we can expect. We have just tried that for 4 years now, to the tune of $6 trillion dollars of deficit spending, and a federal govenment that is going through $3.67 Trillion of spending each fiscal year under Barrack Obama and the Democrats in control of the Senate. We don't have the luxury in our fiscal situation or our moribund privatee sector economy to support this kind of nonsense any further....its definitely well past time for a change. 2010 was just the beginning of the turn around...that managed to bring the deficit spending down from $1.5 Trillion in the first year of the Obama Administration to $1.1 Trillion estimated this year. That's already also cost us one downgrade in our previous sterling Natiional Credit Rating. But that $300 Billion reduction is hardly enough...put a Romney/Ryan team in the White House, and put the Republicans in control of the now Democrat Party controlled do nothing Senate (blocked passage of a budget for three years running now), to go along with their control of the House of Representatives, and we have an opportunity to put this spiral downward headed for another recession next year and another (credit downgrade) as the CBO stated just yesterday if we continue on the failed policies and practices of this present administration.
To Godwinize this one, Grandpa, you would've made a "good German." The Allied Army is coming over the the hill, bombs are falling all around, and you've ignored the carnage of Romney's business practices, the wholesale attempt to roll back women and minority rights to the 1950's, and gut education for God-knows-what reasons.
http://www.classwarfareexists.com/they-brought-in-security-guards-they-fired-us-all-they-walked-us-out-of-the-building/#axzz24NUu1vzj
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57435891-503544/in-ohio-biden-continues-attack-on-romneys-time-at-bain/
But while as many as 185 workers near Buffalo lost jobs in a 1999 plant closing, Bain Capital and its investors ultimately made more than $100 million on the deal.
Fortunately, your scenario isn't going to work (you could move here to Planet Utah however; you'd find plenty of company in Happy Valley south of me where Mitt-for-Brains went to school on his daddy's stock money. Of course you'd have to participate in discussing "9-11 was an Inside Job" ideas along with the standard Kennedy Assassination fare--whoops, forgot to mention Bigfoot is pretty much gospel as well.... And the jury is still out whether the moon landings were faked, honest...
Okay, I'm going to need a bath after this one, but I just clicked on FAUX Noise (hey, I've been known to pick up a National Enquirer a time or two as well). Nothing on the slew of polls out showing Obama's electoral advantage (supposedly with Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, and New Hampshire in play, which they're not); MSNBC which you're shaking your fist at, is trying to suggest this one is going to be close, and it's not going to be...
Here's a sample of FAUX's honesty: They're continuing the "OPSEC Story" where headcase is trying to smear the President for his role in Bin Laden's removal. There is zero--repeat zero--mention that the headcase behind that story is a Birther.
Sucks to be a Teabot... Or is it a Teabought?
Say Keith...what publication did you plagiarize your long and exceedingly boring post from? Obviously, some right-wing "masterpiece" of nonsense. Never mind...other than you, who cares?
Nothing but wasted space anyway.
Hmmm...."Nott"..."Nott". Wonder what that can possibly mean?
@SL Cabbie,
How about all the foreign jobs Obama paid for?
How many CEO's has the Obama Justice Department been able to prosecute?
Fortunately Obama doesn't have a business record to run on, I'm sure it would have failed. He would have been wanting the governement to build it for him, for sure.
@eyes: Nice rebuttal... only shows your short attention span... not suprising for an msnbcer
@dave...
Sacre Blue!!! OK...you found me out. I have to admit, when I saw the length of Keith's diatribe, I started to nod off about the time I read
Someday you too may realize a hard fact about Keith that we've come to know: When he starts on a rant, there's usually no stopping him until either his head hits the keyboard, his fingers knot up, he can't find anything worthwhile to copy in his usual attempt at deflection, he takes a stab at improving his grammar, or a combination of any/all the above.
He's remarkably deficient at giving proper credit to the author(s) of that which he so freely plagiarizes or at providing any confirming site links to bolster whatever it is he's saying.
Much like his dissertation above. The clue that this wasn't his original work is unmistakably evidenced by one of those aforementioned traits.
Foreign jobs? You really want to open a can of worms like that with Romney's track record on creating foreign jobs in the mix?
Cute...is that an original "@dave"?
And yet, here are you...
You aren't somehow related to Keith, are you?
Where did this clown Keith Longey originate from? another crazy planet of GOP morons? is he practicing "cut & paste" features of his new pc? Keith, stop watching Fox news and stop listening to fools like Limbaugh and Beck. You can have some hope.
Dave, by "foreign job Obama paid for" do you mean the Bin Laden operation?
You definitely put the ho' in ad hominem...
Apparently my arguments didn't leave the liberal leftwingnuts speechless, but I note they didn't even try to refute any of my arguments...just some usual anti Bain Capital nonsense from the Cab Driver. May I remind you, that in desperation now, Obama has enlisted a former Bain Capital consultant to try to gain a perspective on how to turnaround this failing economy his Obamanomics has saddled us with...apparently he has come not to believe his own attack adds, just as ex President Bill Clinton, ex Governor Ed Randel, present Governor Patrick Duval of Massachusetts (where the private investment firm that Romney founded, led, and was CEO of until Feb. 1999 is headquarterd in Boston's financial district), Newark Mayor Cory Booker, and Obama's own Car Czar Ed Rattner, Democrats all, tried to tell him months ago that his lying attacks on Bain Capital and Romney's business career were wrong, and far from the truth of this firms "sterling" record as Bill Clinton put it, turning around previously failing companies in troubled industries, to the tune of an 85% success rate,
Now Obama wants to know the secrets of that success to try to come up with a plan he can announce to try to save his re-election chances.
Reason we're not speechless is a) we're not wingnuts, b) you stole the term, and finally c) you flunked seventh grade math and don't understand the equation lie ≠ argument.
And the Bain Capital stuff didn't come from me; I was just the one delivering it...
That's because you don't make any arguments, Keith, you only toss out your unsubstantiated opinions, which, as most of who have read anything you've posted already know, those and a nickel may (but only maybe) get you a piece of gum.
It's almost getting to the point that I'd require you to post proof if you said the sun rises in the east, simply because YOU said it.
BTW...the subject of this thread is Medicare and welfare...you would do well to try and stick to the salient points contained therein, assuming you have the capability of doing so. Now, if you tell me I'm wrong on that assumption, I would probably believe you.
Like I said, stand-up comedy and truthfulness just aren't in your bailiwick, are they? That's OK...there are so-o-o many other things that aren't in there either, so they won't be lonely.
You might fear Obama as president for the next 4 years, but fear for humanity as we know it if Romney gets the nod.
The failed policies of the BUSH ADMINISTRATION are what got us here in the first place in to this precarious financial crisis.
We cannot go back to the failed policies of the Bush Administration. And this is exactly what Ryan/Romney are calling for. Build up the 1% and smash the rest of America.
If we continue to gut the middle class . . . who will buy the products that the wealthy sell to make profits ? No one. This is basic economics.
In an effort to dismantle the middle class, working class, females, people of color, Democratic voting population, the Radical, Reich-Wing, Republicans are destroying this whole country.
But hey, keep selecting against your own survival by supporting them. Good luck with that.
Here's another Clinton-era Cabinet member who agrees with us...
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79937.html
Democrats should blame George W. Bush “forever” for the nation’s problems, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright joked at a Barack Obama campaign rally.
A Gallup Poll conducted in June found 68 percent of Americans believe Bush deserves a great or moderate amount of blame for the economy. Only 52 percent said the same of Obama.
Nonsense...it was the combined housing market bubble of 1995 to 2005 coupled with Alan Greenspan's actions of fighting early attempts of the Republicans in Congress in the last years of the Clinton Administration to regulate the growing like topsy derivative market that the big money centered banks were gambling with as they went to unheard of leverage on bundled bad mortagages that caused the financial crisis. And that is still pretty much going on today with the barely reugulated derivative markets, as the only thing that TARP did was to recapitalize the banks and AIG, while the bad paper is still out there, and regulators have under Dodd-Frank gone overboard stopping bankers from making normal mortgage and commericial and business loans and in their zeal to run the banks now.
Yes, Romney and Ryan are telling so many lies about medicare and welfare reform. This is sick because you could have potential elderly people believing this crap. They (seniors) would be making serious error in voting for someone that is not telling them the truth that could effect their benefits. This is sick that Romney and Ryan would do this to our seniors. I hope they (seniors) would have children to explain to them that Romney and Ryan are lying and it could cost them. This is some of the reason why majority of American do not like Romney and Ryan because they lie and distort the truth. This does not show any humanity for the human beings that paid and depend on these programs. Romney/Ryan will do more harm than good for the American people. In addition, they want the American people to believe that we need to make some hard choices. Okay, tell that line when you are ready to say that their would be a tax increase for the top 1% and not a decrease. Therefore, do not tell say that America is going broke when you want to give the rich a tax decrease and cut programs for the needed, middle class, and seniors.
Both sides are lying. Under Obama's plan, most doctors will stop accepting Medicare... it will probably happen under the Republicans plan too. Sooner or Later. There ain't enough money to pay for everybody's pharmaceuticals and for all the lawyers that leech off the medical industry.
Mitt Romney: Gold Medal in Dishonesty
By Dr Brian Moench* - Truthout | News Analysis
Even as Mitt and Ann Romney were going for a gold medal with their dressage horse, Rafalca, in the London Summer Olympics, Mitt already - in my opinion - had a gold medal wrapped up. Maybe not for horse dancing, but for mental gymnastics, and by that I mean lying. And not just for lying about his Bain Capital tenure, or being deliberately deceitful about Obama. I think a serious fundamental defect in Mitt has been on display for a long time.
In 1969, at age 19, I went on a Mormon mission just like Mitt. I eventually supervised about 200 other missionaries. A few years later, while living in Boston during my medical residency, I also attended the same church as Mitt and Ann Romney. Mitt had several high callings from the Mormon Church hierarchy during his time in Boston, eventually supervising the ecclesiastic affairs of about 4,000 Boston Mormons, much like a shepherd watching over his flock. Ann and my wife shared positions of responsibility in our local "ward," and in that capacity, Ann was in our home several times.
My wife and I both thought highly of Ann and liked her as a friend and a fellow church member. We liked Mitt as well, in that he was married to Ann. Mitt would offer a firm, robotic handshake on Sunday mornings, but he managed to make his "Good morning, it's great to see you," feel condescending and superficial.
Mitt was distinctly impersonal and it seemed his interest in me was only to the degree that I could further his career, which I couldn't - I had no pedigree to enhance the value of my Harvard appointment. He was nakedly ambitious and it was widely assumed by fellow church members that he would eventually run for president.
Mitt climbed quickly up the Mormon Church ladder, becoming a "Stake President" at a very young age, while simultaneously laying the foundation of his high-profile political career. Within the Mormon faithful his ascendancy to the doorstep of the presidency is viewed with almost as much anticipation as the Second Coming of Jesus. They look to a Mitt presidency as validation of their belief system and a golden opportunity to disseminate it worldwide. To them, Mitt embodies simultaneous theological and political triumph.
In contrast to Mitt, I have distanced myself from the Mormon Church after a personal battle between critical thinking and the origins and doctrines of the Church. Nonetheless, I still respect and admire its culture and social strengths and most of my friends and family are active Mormons. But I will not be warmly regarded for divulging anything unflattering about Mitt.
Mitt's interaction with his religion is indeed a legitimate issue for voters, but not for the reasons that have been raised by evangelicals. It is not because Mormonism is a non-Christian cult. Mitt's significant leadership positions in the Mormon Church evokes a much deeper connection to his religion than any other presidential candidate in modern history has had to their religion. Reaching this rather exalted state within the church is supposed to manifest not just one's extraordinary commitment to the church, but also to behavior and a value system beyond reproach. A Mormon Stake President is expected to live an exemplary, Christ-like life. Therefore, it is not only fair, but important to ask: does Mitt's behavior and value system meet those lofty expectations?
As a Bishop and a Stake President in the Mormon Church, Mitt would have interviewed thousands of church members to sign off on their worthiness to attend ceremonies in the ultra-sacred and exclusive Mormon temples. One of the key questions he would have been required to ask in those interviews would have been, "Are you honest in your dealings with your fellow man?" That question is intentionally vague, but is supposed to weed out people who tell lies, cheat on their taxes or are dishonest in business transactions. If Mitt would be unable to truthfully answer yes to that question of honesty, then he is not just someone who we would cynically write off as just another dishonest politician, but he would qualify also as an extraordinary hypocrite. It would be like John Edwards sitting in judgment on someone else's marital fidelity.
Even mainstream journalists have written about Mitt taking political lying and disdain for the facts to a new art form on campaign issues ranging from his tenure at Bain to blatantly dishonest ads about his opponents, first in the Republican primaries and now about President Obama. Michael Cohen of The Guardian UK typified many of these observations with the statement, "Romney is doing something very different and far more pernicious. Quite simply, the United States has never been witness to a presidential candidate, in modern American history, who lies as frequently, as flagrantly and as brazenly as Mitt Romney." Jonathan Chait, columnist for New York Magazine says Mitt is "Just making stuff up now."
Even worse, Mitt repeats the same lies over and over, even after they've been debunked. He appears completely unconcerned about being caught. That's a new level of mendacity. MSNBC's Steve Benen observed, "Romney gets away with it because he and his team realize contemporary political journalism isn't equipped to deal with a candidate who lies this much, about so many topics, so often." It reminds me of Linda Obst's book, "Hello, He Lied."
The most disturbing part of the story of Mitt, as a high school senior, assaulting a gay classmate and butchering his hair, is not the story itself - many responsible adults did regrettable things as teenagers - but it is the almost guaranteed lie last month that he couldn't remember ever having done it. His cohorts in crime remembered it vividly and later became deeply disturbed about taking part in it.
When Mitt was in Salt Lake City in 2002 managing the Olympics, he apparently told another whopper. During a traffic jam going to one of the Olympic events, Mitt was outraged at what he viewed as an incompetent volunteer directing traffic. As reported in the Salt Lake Tribune, during several articles that became a hot topic of conversation in Utah, the volunteer and several witnesses, including a captain in the Sheriff's department, said he let out a profanity-laced tirade directed at that volunteer that included dropping the "f-bomb." Use of that kind of language may not seem like much of an offense now, but for a high-ranking Mormon official to use that kind of language anywhere, let alone in a public venue, would be as shocking and disillusioning to the Mormon faithful as if it had been uttered by the prophet Joseph Smith himself. Never apologetic, Mitt vehemently denied that it ever happened.
But there is more dishonesty to Mitt than has been printed so far. There is a stark failure to live his religion, at least to the level of what should be expected of one who has risen to the upper echelons of Mormon ecclesiastical authority.
First, Mitt's recent statements about believing that marriage is "an enduring institution only between a man and a woman" is not what the Mormon Church believes. The history of the Mormon Church's practice of polygamy during the 19th century is well known (my great grandfather was a polygamist), slightly less well known is its official renouncement of the practice in 1890.
But what is not publicly known is that Mormon men can still marry, for "time and all eternity" in Mormon temples, sequentially more than one wife. If a Mormon male gets divorced or becomes a widower, he can marry another woman in the temple and be sealed for eternity to multiple wives. This option is available to males, Church leaders and laity alike, but not to women. Those subsequent "temple" marriages are considered as eternally binding as first marriages. In other words, the most sacred of Mormon rituals - holy, eternal marriage - implies that polygamy is still practiced in the highest stations of glory in heaven.
Mitt knows this very well. For obvious reasons he would be loathe to admit it publicly. But either he doesn't believe in this Mormon practice, which would contradict his high callings in the Church, which require strict adherence to its orthodoxy, or he doesn't believe what he proclaims publicly is his political position on who should be allowed to marry. Fundamental dishonesty in either case.
Second, contrary to pronouncements by many evangelicals that Mormons are not Christians, Mormons do consider the life and teachings of Jesus Christ to be the centerpiece of their spiritual beliefs. All of the purported teachings of Jesus described in the New Testament - the four Gospels, the Sermon on the Mount, etc. - are the heart and soul of Mormon theology and the standard by which they believe their behavior will be judged, from both a mortal and an eternal perspective.
Eschewing personal wealth and materialism and giving generously to the poor is a core tenet of New Testament theology. The hallmark of that tenet is Jesus comparing the difficulty of a rich man entering into the kingdom of God to the difficulty of a camel passing through the eye of a needle (Matthew 19:24). Everyone knows Mitt is extraordinarily wealthy, but, as is currently being heavily exploited by the Obama camp, he acquired at least some of his wealth in dubious ways. In fact, if the business model of Bain Capital were to be placed in a New Testament backdrop, the most obvious candidates to play the role of Bain would be the money changers in the temple that Jesus dispatched with an outburst of fury, or the robbers in the parable of the good Samaritan.
How does one coldly order the calculated financial demise of thousands of workers, pocket hundreds of millions of dollars in the process and walk away "on water," à la Jesus Christ?
One has to ask: if Mitt was a genuine "Christ-like" spiritual icon in the Mormon Church, just how many million-dollar dressage show horses would Jesus own? How many multimillion dollar estates with car elevators would Jesus need for his vacations? In which of the Cayman Islands would Jesus shield his wealth? There is little evidence that, beyond paying his Mormon tithe of 10 percent, he spent any significant percentage of his hundreds of millions of dollars feeding the hungry, helping the poor, ministering to the sick or visiting those in prison. Mitt certainly seems to be at odds with Luke 12:48: "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required."
Third, Bain reportedly would not invest in companies profiting from alcohol and tobacco, which violate Mormon behavioral standards, but Romney apparently has no problem accepting tens of millions of dollars from people like casino magnates Steven Wynn and Sheldon Adelson, despite the fact that Mormonism considers gambling a sin. I'm sure Romney hasn't asked either billionaire if any of the money they donated might have also come from the proceeds of any of other sins that go on in Las Vegas casinos, any of which would also violate Mormon standards.
As Mitt flies from one mega mansion to another, collecting hundreds of millions of dollars from the country's billionaires to put him in the driver's seat of a new government even more hostile to the less fortunate, one wonders where the scriptures are that suggest the Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Billionaires are one and the same.
Mitt's now legendary and record-breaking flip-flopping is routinely written off as political pandering and insincerity. Those terms are too soft. It is another form of lying. It is simply not believable that a politician could so thoroughly change every one of his core beliefs over the short time that Mitt professes to have done so. That is unless he had no core beliefs, other than that he should be president. In that case, pretending that he has core beliefs is another manifestation of dishonesty.
Mitt has arrogantly dismissed criticism of his wealth as the ugly underbelly of envy. This will probably come as a genuine surprise to Mitt, but many of us, perhaps most of us, aren't envious at all. Most of us don't need a private jet, multiple Cadillacs, or horses with aristocratic names in order feel O.K. about ourselves. Many of us would feel embarrassed or ashamed allowing ourselves that much grotesque self-indulgence.
Mitt, many people's lives were ruined in building your pot of gold. Not everyone is willing to do that. My criticism of your wealth has nothing to do with envy, but everything to do with the dysfunctional moral compass you use to guide your life's work. Despite your high-profile position in the Mormon Church, it is a compass that seems grossly at odds with the teachings of Jesus Christ. And your ambition has allowed you to rationalize that dishonesty as well.Tuesday, 07 August 2012
*Brian Moench MD is a member of Union of Concerned Scientists and an environmental/public health activist living in Salt Lake City, Utah.
________________________________________________
Geeze, was that necessary Salzie? Couldn't you just have easily announced that you are another anti-Morman bigot, and let it go at that? Seems to me that you might just watch the NBC reports on Mitt Romney and the Mormon Church to learn a little something...like the fact that as a bishop in the Mormon Church in Boston, Mitt Romney worked dilgently providing counseling to practioners in their lifes' trials and tribulations, up to 30 hours a day (or evening) on top of his duties as the leader and CEO of Bain Capital and his own domestic life as a husband and father of 5. Oh, but the liberal press seems to want to paint a picture of a detached, cold man that can't equate to his fellow man like Barry Obama from Indonesia, pot and beer happy highschool and Ivory league college and university, and the union community organization and Chicago political mob upbringing can. "Let's all sit down and have a beer" Now that is the kind of man we need as President! LOL!
Yes, it was a bit long, but it made ever so much more sense than your #3 did, Keith.
But then, you weren't the original author of the contents of that post, were you? Easy enough to tell...
The repubs are going to lose this fall. Of this I am certain, I just cant believe there will be any majority voting for these psychotic T-Nutjobbies. There may be some uneducated head nodders that go their way but anyone with a half a brain will be steering as far from them as possible due to the stench....
Regards
Romney is undermining his credibility with everyone but Foxbots and talking radio zombies. Romney's a congenital liar and folks with scruples care about the truth so at this point Mitt Romney is self destructing. Americans aren't thugs and hoodlums like this new GOP brotherhood of nincompoops, whackadoos, charlatans, and liars. . Many old white righties apparently relish underhanded, devious, dishonest tactics, but almost everybody else still has some chivalry and decorum and honesty in their American blood and bone. Romney clearly isn't a man of religious principle, he's a lying shark. .Gobama!
Obama 46%, Romey 45%. And who do you believe will handle the nations's economic problems better? Romney 56%, Obama 39%. Can't argue much with those poll results, and the real campaign, with its conventions and debates, haven't even begun!
There shoud be a warning in this poll...Question: Who do you believe the media is going to try to support in their coverage in the Presidential election? Answer: 61% said Obama, and only 15% said Romney. Better be careful not to swallow whole the pap this network puts out, libs!
The GOP is a corporate theocracy. Republicans are corporotheocratic. They worship the corporate Golden Calf. They're a false religion. Gobama!
Romney/Ryan like to save the truth for 'private rooms' so that they can fool everyone into electing them...
sure, Keith. Totally convincing essay. Excellent rebuttal. (he said, as if any of it made sense)
I see like other (Eyes Wide Shut, and Cab Driver) you too are totally devoid on any answer or rebuttal to my arguments, Mark!
Months ago, I told the joke about the Scottish mother watching the parade and how she was proud that only her Johnnie was the one who wasn't out of step...
Grandpa didn't get it then, and still doesn't.
Should I retell it by renaming her son? Be a bit obvious...
46% Obama, 45% Romney. After hundred of million of dollars spent in attack adds on Romney's character and "sterling" (in the words of Bill Clinton) business reputation. And I'm the only one out of step? Seems like I have a lot of company in the real world away from this blog, Cab Driver.
By the way, new jobless claims increased again this week as announced today. Too bad for the economy, and too bad for the American citizens who deserve better, but really too bad for the Obama re-election chances.
Why gee...thanks, Keith. I strive not to laugh too hard at your self-described "arguments", which are only your opinions or a plagiarized writing of someone else masquerading as what you euphemistically refer to as an "argument". A valid argument can easily be supported with factual references and...oh, sorry, I forgot you don't subscribe to that universal truth...with you, it's like talking to a barn wall.
I can't always contain myself when you start foaming...I try, but the odds of you saying something meaningful, let alone truthful, are just too overwhelming.
Wow, Keith, your post made my eyes bleed.
Pathetic.
Is there an online course in 'Posting Right Wing Gibberish' that you failed?
I get my info from CNBC, Bloomberg News and Business News, CNN, The Wall Street Journal, Barons Magazine, The Economist, and the Hartford Courant...hardly right wing media, Loraxe. But try to answer my arguments (if you can) before dismissing them as pathetic...cat got your tongue?
Keith never mentions his primary sources, the voices in his head...
You know, Cabbie, if Keith REALLY gets his info from those places he named, one has to wonder WHY he's always so afraid to reference the site or the article to back his play on whatever he's talking about. Could it be that we'd validate that he just copied somebody's story, claiming it for his own work? Curious...
Anybody can toss out names of news outlets, publications, etc., but it takes a real person with convictions to actually define something with irrefutable unbiased support for whatever is passing for their "argument". Keith? Not so much...
Personally, given his easily reviewable history citing what he says which is devoid of any supporting factual evidence, I don't think the universe has enough time left to ever see Keith stand up on his hind legs.
What I dont understand is why are so many doctors turning away new medicare patients? Seems like they would be taking more if the government is not cutting the amount that they are paying the doctors.