The 2012 Democratic Convention

 

 

 

 

Photo's and images courtesy of "Google Images".

by Felicity Blaze Noodleman

 

Going through Google Images trying to find a good photo of the Democratic convention for this article on day two of the coverage in Charlotte, N. Carolina I am finding so many pic.’s of Bill Clinton.  Is he running again?  I’m starting to think X Presidents should be seen and not heard!  Where is the Obama coverage?  Well maybe I’ll find something tomorrow. 

 

 From the Convention floor.

 

When I was watching television the other night I saw a campaign ad to reelect President Obama only the president was not pictured speaking; it was President Bill Clinton.  Hey wait;  Is this 1992 again?  President Obama seems to need a surrogate or handler to speak on his behalf to get reelected?  If only he had done a better job, he could have run as his own man.  Oh please; no more Bill Clinton!

 

President Clinton makes the pitch, “We need to keep going with President Obama’s economic plan”.  Well if the Obama plan was working wouldn’t we know it without being told that it was working?   Also; this ad asks us to assume that Clinton was a great President, but in reality he was the second President to ever be impeached by Congress and there were a few other problems with the Clinton Presidency.  Problems such as allowing issues in the Middle East to go unchecked.  Attacks on US embassy’s and military installations such as the USS Cole which were not addressed.  Below is an article from "Forbes" on the Clinton Taxes:

The Dangerous Myth

About The Bill Clinton Tax Increase

by Charles Kadlec, Contributor

I cover economic/political issues with liberty as my polar star.

"The real lesson of the Clinton Presidency is the way back to prosperity lies not through increased taxes on “the rich,” but through tax and regulatory reform and a return to a rules based monetary policy that produces a strong and stable dollar".

One of the most dangerous myths that has infected the current debate over the direction of tax policy is the oft repeated claim that the tax increases under President Bill Clinton led to the boom of the 1990s. In their Wall Street Journal Op-Ed last Friday, for example, Clinton campaign manager James Carville and Democratic pollster and Clinton advisor Stanley Greenberg write the increase in the top tax rate to 39.6% “produced the one period of shared prosperity in this past era (since 1980).”

While this myth is now a central part of liberal Democratic folklore, it is contradicted by the political disaster and poor economic results that followed the tax increase. The real lesson of the Clinton Presidency is the way back to prosperity lies not through increased taxes on “the rich,” but through tax and regulatory reform and a return to a rules based monetary policy that produces a strong and stable dollar.

The 1993 Clinton tax increase raised the top two income tax rates to 36% and 39.6%, with the top rate hitting joint returns with incomes above $250,000 ($400,000 in 2012 dollars). In addition, it removed the cap on the 2.9% Medicare payroll tax, raised the corporate tax rate to 35% from 34%, increased the taxable portion of Social Security benefits, and imposed a 4.3 cent per gallon increase in transportation fuel taxes.

If these tax increases were good for the middle class, then they should have been popular. Yet, in the 1994 elections, the Democratic Party suffered historic losses. Even though Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell had declared the unpopular HillaryCare dead in September of that year, the Republican Party gained 54 seats in the House and 8 seats in the Senate to win control of both the House and the Senate for the first time since 1952.

Second, Messrs. Carville and Greenberg are contradicted by their former boss. Speaking at a fund raiser in 1995, President Clinton said: ”Probably there are people in this room still mad at me at that budget because you think I raised your taxes too much. It might surprise you to know that I think I raised them too much, too.”

During the first four years of his Presidency, real GDP growth average 3.2%, respectable relative to today’s economy, but disappointing coming as it did following just one year of recovery from the 1991 recession, the end of the Cold War and the reduction in consumer price inflation below 3% for the first time (with the single exception of 1986) since 1965.

For example, it was a half a percentage point slower than under Reagan during the four years following the first year of the recovery from the 1982 recession.

Employment growth was a respectable 2 million a year. But real hourly wages continued to stagnate, rising only 2 cents to 7.43 an hour in 1996 from $7.41 in 1992. No real gains for the middle class there.

Federal government receipts increased an average of $90 billion a year while the annual increase in federal spending was constrained to $45 billion. That led to a $183 billion, four-year reduction in the budget deficit to $107 billion in 1996.

However, with his masterful 1995 flip-flop on taxes, President Clinton took the first step toward a successful campaign for re-election and a shift in policy that produced the economic boom that occurred during his second term.

• Welfare reform, which he signed in the summer of 1996, led to a massive reduction in the effective tax rates on the poor by ameliorating the rapid phase out of benefits associated with going to work.


• The phased reduction in tariff and non-tariff barriers between the U.S., Mexico and Canada under the North American Free Trade Agreement continued, leading to increased trade.


• In 1997, Clinton signed a reduction in the (audible liberal gasp) capital gains tax rate to 20% from 28%.


• The 1997 tax cuts also included a phased in increase in the death tax exemption to $1 million from $600,000, and established Roth IRAs and increased the limits for deductible IRAs.


• Annual growth in federal spending was kept to below 3%, or $57 billion.


• The Clinton Administration also maintained its policy of a strong and stable dollar. Over his entire second term, consumer price inflation averaged only 2.4% a year.

 

The boom was on. Between the end of 1996 and the end of 2000:

• Economic growth accelerated a full percentage point to 4.2% a year.
• Employment growth nudged higher, to 2.1 million jobs per year as the unemployment rate fell to 4.0% from 5.4%.
• As the tax rate on capital gains came down, real wages made their biggest advance since the implementation of the Reagan tax rate reductions in the mid 1980s. Real average hourly earnings were (in 1982 dollars) $7.43 in 1996, $7.55 in 1997, $7.75 in 1998, $7.86 in 1999, and $7.89 in 2000.
• Millions of Americans shared in the prosperity as the value of their 401(k)s climbed along with the stock market, which saw the price of the S&P 500 index rise 78%.
• Revenue growth accelerated an astounding 59%, increasing on average $143 billion a year. Combined with continued restraint on government spending, that produced a $198 billion budget surplus in 2000.

Shared prosperity indeed! But one created not by raising tax rates on high income but not yet rich middle class families, and certainly not by raising the capital gains tax rate or by imposing the equivalent of the Buffett rule, a new alternative minimum tax of 30% on incomes over $1 million, nor by massively increasing federal spending.

Rather, it was a prosperity produced by freeing America’s poor from a punitive welfare system, lowering tariffs, reducing tax rates on the creators of wealth, limiting the growth of federal government expenditures, and providing a strong and stable dollar to businesses and families in America and throughout the world.

A shared prosperity can be achieved again. But to do so, the American people will have to overcome the envy feeding myth perpetrated by President Barack Obama and the spin-masters and leadership of the Democratic Party that raising tax rates on high incomes will somehow lead to more job creation, more opportunity and increased prosperity and security for the middle-class.

Forbes

 

Another big issue In the Clinton ad was the “regulation” statement.  Government regulation and taxes have run so much industry out of this country.  I remember writing to President Clinton about the country loosing so many jobs and how it was going to adversely affect the nation and how it would create a huge tax deficit not to mention all the pay checks for American workers.  I really believe that Democrats just don’t care about Americans! 

 

 

 



Hey; I've been Impeached for perjury and after all -  two liars are better than one!

 

 

There used to be a thriving electronics and home appliance which built everything from televisions to blenders in our country.  There used to be a thriving steel industry in this country to supply automobiles manufactures and all the other industry in this country.  NOW WE ARE THE LARGEST DEBTOR NATION IN THE WORLD! 

 

General Motors has cut three major brands from their company, Pontiac, Oldsmobile and Saturn.  Buicks and Chevrolets are now built in China because regulation and taxes have made it cheaper.  We used to have a fourth automobile company in the United States known as “American Motors” which was driven out of business in the 1970’s by government regulation and taxes.   All of this has happened because of government regulation and taxation under the Democrats.  These were all good paying American jobs with benefit packages that have been driven out of the country by the Democrats with their regulations and taxes.


 

The "Presidential Approval Tracker" from "USA Today". See how the

President is below the 50% rating for a large part of his first term.

Regulation and taxes have made it cheaper for foreign competition to flood the US market with cheap foreign products which do not have any government regulation nor do these companies pay the same employee wages and benefits which the American workers fought for over decades of collective bargaining.

 

The Democrats have destroyed American industry.  This last decade the Democrats have severely crippled American housing values buy forcing home lenders to make loans to buyers who could not qualify for home loans.  As we all know this led to the so called collapse of the housing bubble.  If you have ever lost a job due to a factory closing, company moving overseas, lost a home or had your home value toppled, the Democrats are the most likely for the blame.  Their house of cards has completely fallen down. 

 

World socialism, the Russians and European Socialists must be
so proud of the American Democratic party!

 

So what is it with the Democrats?  What are they going to destroy next?  If we have to hear anything from the X President, could he please explain how  he, Ted Kennedy, Barny Frank, Chris Dodd, Barrack Obama, Joe Biden and the rest of the Democrats got it so wrong and brought down the whole economy by selling houses to people who could not afford them!

 

Finally;  what have the Democrats been doing for Sr.’s lately?  Have they completely forgotten about Social Security and Medicare?  It would appear so.  Under a Congress with Democrats in charge they have denied Sr.’s their cost of living increases twice.  Oh yea, and there is the $716 Billion President Obama is trying to take from Medicare to fund his “Obama Care” health coverage.



The Noodleman Group has put together some headlines from the convention with their respective contributors from the convention below:

Five Takeaways From The Last Night

Of The Democratic Convention

by Eyder Peralta  npr

If you missed the last night of the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C., we live blogged it here.

But if you want a quick review, we've compiled five things that struck us about the night:

Times Have Changed, Obama Has Changed, Hope Has Changed: The Obama we saw on Thursday was a more sober and realistic man than the one we saw in 2008, or for that matter than the one we saw in 2004, when he delivered a lyrical ode to American unity.

The Obama we saw today didn't run from the promises of hope and change central to his previous campaign. But he presented a tempered, more serious version of it, one seen through the prism of a man at the tail end of his first term as president. In fact, Obama hardly smiled. He said:

"I recognize that times have changed since I first spoke to this convention. The times have changed — and so have I.

"I'm no longer just a candidate. I'm the President. I know what it means to send young Americans into battle, for I have held in my arms the mothers and fathers of those who didn't return. I've shared the pain of families who've lost their homes, and the frustration of workers who've lost their jobs. If the critics are right that I've made all my decisions based on polls, then I must not be very good at reading them. And while I'm proud of what we've achieved together, I'm far more mindful of my own failings, knowing exactly what Lincoln meant when he said, 'I have been driven to my knees many times by the overwhelming conviction that I had no place else to go.'

"But as I stand here tonight, I have never been more hopeful about America. Not because I think I have all the answers. Not because I'm naïve about the magnitude of our challenges.

"I'm hopeful because of you."

This Was An Obama Love Fest: This wasn't a convention for politicians who wanted to talk about their own accomplishments. In that way, it was very different from the Republican National Convention. It was a convention that embraced President Obama and his policies with a great, big bear hug.

Every speaker, every video, every message said the same thing: President Obama is the man for the job.

Biden Embraced His Tempered Role: Vice President Biden was given a less-than-ideal speaking spot in this convention. Normally, the vice president speaks during prime time, on a different day from the president.

Biden gave up his Wednesday spot in favor of former President Bill Clinton. And tonight he spoke in the 9 p.m. hour. [Correction at 11:30 a.m., Sept. 7: Earlier, we mistakenly said the vice president gave up a Thursday speaking slot. It was a Wednesday slot that he ceded to former President Clinton. We've fixed the mistake.]

The speech he gave was restrained. He certainly sprinkled in some of his typical humor. But mostly that came when he talked about Mitt Romney. When he spoke about Obama, he was very serious; he slowed down his cadence and at times, he almost whispered.

That said, as the man closest to the president's decisions, he served as a character witness.

"Bravery," he said, "resides in the heart of Barack Obama."

The Democrats Were Disciplined With Their Message, Except When They Weren't: This convention was preceded by a big whoops, when Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley was asked whether Americans were better off than they were four years ago. He said, "No."

But after that the Democrats mostly stayed on message. There was the platform dust-up. But day after day, speaker after speaker, Democrats delivered the same talking points about "building the economy from the middle out and not from the top down." And woman after woman said that under Obama, "being a woman is no longer a pre-existing condition."

And, Thursday, Sen. John Kerry delivered the answer Democrats most likely hoped O'Malley had given on Sunday. He said:

"President Obama kept his promises. He promised to end the war in Iraq — and he has — and our heroes have come home. He promised to end the war in Afghanistan responsibly — and he is — and our heroes there are coming home. He promised to focus like a laser on al-Qaeda — and he has — our forces have eliminated more of its leadership in the last three years than in all the eight years that came before. And after more than ten years without justice for thousands of Americans murdered on 9/11, after Mitt Romney said it would be 'naive' to go into Pakistan to pursue the terrorists, it took President Obama, against the advice of many, to give that order to finally rid this earth of Osama bin Laden. Ask Osama bin Laden if he is better off now than he was four years ago."

The Next Big Thing: We're yet to see what the polling repercussions of these back-to-back conventions will be.

But the next big duel will be mano a mano, when Obama and Romney take the stage during the three scheduled debates.

Debates were seen as a weak spot for Romney. But during the GOP primaries, he honed his skills. Still, he spent this week preparing for his debate against Obama.

The first debate is Oct. 3 at the University of Denver. The second is Oct. 16 at Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y. The third is Oct. 22 at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla.

The vice presidential debate is Oct. 11 at Centre College in Danville, Ky.

npr

 

Obama team disavows

video comment on government

By David Jackson   USA TODAY

CHARLOTTE -- President Obama's campaign is distancing itself from a Democratic convention video in which a speaker says "government is the only thing that we all belong to."

 

Republicans quickly jumped on the comment, saying it reflects the Democrats' eagerness to impose government on people's lives.

"We don't belong to government, the government belongs to us," tweeted GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

Dan Murrey, the executive director of the Charlotte in 2012 Host Committee, said in a statement that it produced the video -- entitled "Welcome to Charlotte" -- that was designed to promote the city and welcome guests to the convention.

"The intent of this video was to tell the story of this region and it is completely unaffiliated with the Obama campaign or the Democratic National Committee," Murrey said.

The website Buzzfeed, which cut the video clip shown above, said it received an e-mail from an Obama for America campaign official it did not identify:

"The video in question was produced and paid for by the host committee of the city of Charlotte. It's neither an OFA nor a DNC (Democratic National Committee) video, despite what the Romney campaign is claiming. It's time for them to find a new target for their faux outrage."

usa Today


According to Thursday nights speeches by President Obama and Vice President Biden, they are now in the job creation business.  "Well isn't that special" is all I can say.  Why haven't they been into creating jobs during their first four years in office?  Why didn't President Clinton do it during his eight years in office?  The Democrats have never to the best of my recollection and everything that I'm able research been in partnership with business or industry.  All Democrats have done is hand down more and more regulation which has time and time again run industry out of the country taking American jobs over seas.

Fact checking Obama’s and Biden’s

speeches at the Democratic convention in

 

Charlotte

Posted by Glenn Kesslerat 06:02 AM ET, 09/07/2012TheWashingtonPost

 

In their defense of the administration’s policies Thursday night, President Obama and Vice President Biden sometimes took license with the facts or left out important information. Here are some highlights.

“Independent analysis shows that my plan would cut our deficits by $4 trillion. Last summer, I worked with Republicans in Congress to cut $1 trillion in spending.”

— Obama

President Obama repeated a claim made by former President Bill Clinton the night before, but even less accurately. Clinton referred to a “plan of $4 trillion in debt reduction over a decade.” Obama leaves off the time line, and makes it sound like the current $1 trillion deficit would be eliminated, resulting in a surplus.

But, while the numbers seem large, the results are unimpressive. At the end of the 10-year budget window, Obama would have the national debt at a 76.5 percent of gross domestic product. That actually would be an increase over the 74.2 percent of GDP in this year. In contrast, the debt reduction plan envisioned by the Simpson-Bowles commission — cited by the president — would reduce the debt-to-GDP ratio close to 60 percent.

Moreover, independent analysts have criticized the administration for claiming some $800 billion in phantom savings from winding down the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, even though the administration had long made clear those wars would end. (The Bush administration had started the wars on borrowed funds.) Then, the president proposes to spend a good chunk of the nonexistent money on other spending — as he put it in his speech, “rebuilding roads and bridges; schools and runways.”

The $1 trillion in savings negotiated with Republicans, mentioned by the president, actually accounts for the bulk of his proposed reduction in spending. Indeed, much of the president’s debt reduction would come from tax increases on the wealthy, not spending cuts.

“I’ve signed trade agreements that are helping our companies sell more goods to millions of new customers."

— Obama

Obama did sign into law new trade agreements with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama — which were negotiated by the George W. Bush administration. The trade deals were held up for months by a bitter dispute between the administration and Congress over restoring aid for workers hurt by free trade.

Obama has not negotiated any other free-trade agreements.

“We will keep the promise of Social Security by taking the responsible steps to strengthen it — not by turning it over to Wall Street.”

— Obama

This is a bit of straw man. Obama’s rival, Mitt Romney, briefly supported private accounts as part of Social Security in the 2008 campaign but no longer does.

In his 2010 book, “No Apology,” Romney makes it clear that the 2008 stock market turmoil had changed his thinking on the issue. “The 2008 stock market collapse is proof, however, that we can’t always count on positive returns from these investments,” Romney writes. He said individual accounts could still be considered but would need to be phased in over time. Most important, he added, “I would prefer that individual accounts were added to Social Security, not diverted from it, and that they were voluntary.” (See page 160.)

In other words, Romney has concluded that mandatory private accounts won’t work. The plan he supports now is strikingly similar to what then-Vice President Al Gore proposed in the 2000 presidential campaign, what Gore dubbed “Social Security Plus.” Gore said the accounts would be voluntary and “not be the product of any reduction or diversion of Social Security revenues.”

Meanwhile, Obama’s recent budgets have had limited Social Security reforms.

“Barack, as a young man, they had to sit at the end of his mother’s hospital bed, and watch her fight with their insurance company at the very same time that she was fighting for her life.”

— Biden

This is a carefully worded statement that suggests President Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was fighting for health coverage while she was dying. This is a story that Obama frequently told on the campaign trail, but which was later called into question by Dunham’s biographer. Note that Biden does not specify that Dunham was fighting “health insurance” companies.

During the 2008 campaign, Obama frequently suggested his mother had to fight with her health-insurance company for treatment of her cancer because it considered her disease to be a pre-existing condition.

In one of the presidential debates with GOP rival John McCain, Obama said: “For my mother to die of cancer at the age of 53 and have to spend the last months of her life in the hospital room arguing with insurance companies because they’re saying that this may be a pre-existing condition and they don’t have to pay her treatment, there’s something fundamentally wrong about that.”

But then earlier this year, journalist Janny Scott cast serious doubt on this version of events in her biography, “A Singular Woman: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s mother.” Scott reviewed letters from Dunham to the CIGNA insurance company, and revealed the dispute was over disability coverage, not health insurance coverage. (See pages 335-339).

Disability coverage will help replace wages lost to an illness. (Dunham received a base pay of $82,500, plus a housing allowance and a car, to work in Indonesia for Development Alternatives Inc. of Bethesda.) But that is different than health insurance coverage denied because of a pre-existing condition, which was a major part of the president’s health care law.

Biden’s remarks were echoed in the film that aired before Obama spoke. The clips were drawn from a film originally narrated by Tom Hanks — this one was by George Clooney — and we had previously given Three Pinocchios to the film for the manipulative way this story is retold.

“He [Romney] was willing to let Detroit go bankrupt.”

— Biden

This statement is drawn from a headline — “Let Detroit Go Bankrupt” — on an opinion article written by Romney for The New York Times. But he did not say that in the article. (He repeated the line, however, on television.)

Although “bankrupt” often conjures up images of liquidation, Romney called for a “managed bankruptcy.” This is a process in which the company uses the bankruptcy code to discharge its debts, but emerges from the process a leaner, less leveraged company.

Ultimately, along with getting nearly $80 billion in loans and other assistance from the Bush and Obama administrations, GM and Chrysler did go through a managed bankruptcy. But many independent analysts have concluded that taking the approach recommended by Romney would not have worked in 2008, simply because the credit markets were so frozen that a bankruptcy was not a viable option at the time.

“What they didn’t tell you is what they’re [the Romney campaign] proposing would cause Medicare to go bankrupt by 2016.”

— Biden

It is highly misleading to use the phrase “bankrupt.”

There are different parts of Medicare, much of which is paid from general revenues and premiums. Part A, which pays hospitals, has a “trust fund,” made up of special-issue Treasury bonds, that always seems to be on the edge of running dry, even though it is funded by a payroll tax paid by employees and employers. But even so, the payroll tax could pay most estimated expenditures for decades.

“As a matter of fact, he has a new tax proposal — the territorial tax — that experts say will create 800,000 jobs, all of them overseas.”

— Biden

Biden is quoting from one disputed study.

At issue is a Romney proposal, as part of a corporate tax reform, to allow foreign profits by corporations to be exempt from domestic tax. The Simpson-Bowles deficit-reduction Commission, frequently cited by Democrats and Republicans, recommended such a system in its report. “A territorial tax system should be adopted to help put the U.S. system in line with other countries, leveling the playing field,” the report said.

The study cited by Biden, which appeared in Tax Notes, did not actually study Romney’s plan. Moreover, it said that such a system would create 800,000 jobs overseas, but not necessarily at the expense of U.S. jobs if unemployment rates are low.

“Governor Romney believes that it’s okay to raise taxes on the middle class by $2,000 in order to pay for over a trillion dollars in tax cuts for the very wealthy.”

— Biden

The vice president is referring to an estimate of the impact of Romney’s tax plan by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Romney has provided few details of his plan, which he says would lower tax rates while eliminating tax loopholes. The Tax Policy Center calculated that the only way to make the plan revenue neutral would be to eliminate tax preferences that also benefit the middle class, but the Romney campaign has fiercely disputed its findings.

Romney has insisted he would not allow a tax increase on the middle class, so if the findings are correct, he would have to scale back his plan to make the math work.

The Washington Post



I'm Felicity and you've been with the Noodleman Group and as we say in the journalism business, that's -30-.

 

My nose isn't getting any longer.

 

* “The Noodleman Group” is pleased to announce that we are now carrying a link to the “USA Today” news site. We installed the “widget/gadget” August 20, and it will be carried as a regular feature on our site. Now you can read“Noodleman” and then check in to “USA Today” for all the up to date News, Weather, Sports and more! Just scroll all the way down to the bottom of our site and hit the “USA Today” hyperlinks. Enjoy!



The Noodleman Group is on Google Blogger!

The Romney Files

 

Willard  Milton "Mitt" Romney  is the former governor of Massachusetts and a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination. The son of former Michigan Gov. George Romney, who also sought the GOP presidential nod in 1968, Romney was raised in the suburbs of Detroit and served on a Mormon mission in France before going on to earn his undergraduate degree from Brigham Young University and a J.D./M.B.A. from Harvard University. Romney co-founded Bain Capital, ran unsuccessfully for Senate in 1994, and headed the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. He served one term as governor, from 2003-2007, and sought the GOP presidential nomination unsuccessfully in 2008.

By Felicity Blaze Noodleman

 

Has Mitt Romney had his eye on the Presidency since he left office as the Governor of Massachusetts?  One would think that holding the highest office in the nation has been the motivation behind his political aspirations from the beginning of his political career.  Mitt’s father was the Governor from the state of Michigan (1962 – 1969); and was a moderate Republican.  It should be noted that during the time his father was in office the country was advancing the causes of human rights under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson and he was reelected to his office by larger majorities each successive time. 

 

It would appear Mitt’s father is his inspiration in politics.  To say that Mitt is a “Chip off the old block” is a fair evaluation and would be the classic example.  I lived in Michigan as a child during Governor George Romney’s administrations back in the 1960’s, so I feel as though I know something about the candidate and can say the similarities between father and son are very, very close.  What ever the case, there seems to be a sense of civic duty in the Romney family.  If you want to know the candidate better you can read his books.

Mitt has written two books seen above, Amazon.com reviews:

NO APOLOGY

In No Apology, Mitt Romney asserts that American strength is essential—not just for our own well-being, but for the world’s. Nations such as China and a resurgent Russia threaten to overtake us on many fronts, and violent Islamism continues its dangerous rise. In the face of such challenges, America need not apologize for its liberties, but must use them wisely.
We need renewal: fresh ideas to cut through complicated problems and restore our strength. Creative and bold, Romney proposes solutions to restore economic vitality, create good jobs, reduce out-of-control spending on entitlements and health care, dramatically improve education, and rebuild a military battered by years of war. Most important, he calls for a new commitment to citizenship, a common cause we all share, rather than a laundry list of individual demands. Many of his solutions oppose President Obama’s policies, many also run counter to Republican thinking, but all have one strategic aim: to strengthen America and preserve our global leadership.
Personal and dynamically argued, No Apology is a call to action by a man who cares deeply about America’s history, its promise, and its future.


TURNAROUND

From Publishers Weekly

It's not well remembered, but the planned 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics were scandal-ridden and in complete disarray until Romney took over as CEO in early 1999. In this management primer, he makes his rescue job seem very simple: he came in, displayed a positive attitude and hired competent, committed people, and the result was a successful Olympics that few had thought possible. That same attitude is displayed throughout this book, as Romney is quick to credit those around him for the games' success. He's thorough as he details how he revamped the budget, kept costs down and marketed the games to sponsors. His self-deprecating honesty is refreshing and appealing. As he writes after emphasizing the importance of selling the games: "I know there are people out there who love to sell, but it is far from my favorite thing." He's also honest about his criticism of the Salt Lake City leaders who were tainted by their efforts to buy votes from International Olympic Committee members to get the city the games. The same traits that make Romney, now the governor of Massachusetts, an unobtrusive leader don't always serve the book; some readers will want to see more sparks fly. But those looking for a training manual in how to run a high-profile organization will be rewarded.
 

 

Show More

Show Less

So how well did Mitt Romney do in his one term as the Governor of Massachusetts?  This article from the "Boston Globe" below appraises his tenure:

By Scot Lehigh

     Globe Columnist       June 01, 2012

 

 

What Mitt Romney did and didn’t do for the state

 

 

the boston globe/file   Mitt Romney was the governor of Massachusetts from 2003-2007.

The State House was ground zero in the duel between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney Thursday, with each camp taking to the storied front steps to critique and tweak the rival candidate.

To hear Team Obama tell it, Romney was a complete flop during his four years as governor; to listen to the pre-buttal Team Romney cobbled together in anticipation, Romney was a job-creating wonder compared to the Jimmy Carter-esque incumbent president.

So what to make of it all? First, a couple of event observations. Conspicuous by his absence was Deval L. Patrick, our state’s popular incumbent governor and favorite Obama surrogate. Instead, the local headliner was Lieutenant Governor Tim Murray, who has roamed the state as a badly dented denizen of the land of the undead since news broke that he had been bitten by notorious public-sector vampire Michael McLaughlin. Add to the mix a long, rambling filibuster from former North Adams Mayor-for-Life John Barrett, and this observer found himself wondering: Who, exactly, picked this lineup?

The catalogue of criticisms directed Romney-ward were about what you’d expect: He didn’t pay sufficient attention to Barrett and other Democratic mayors, he cut funds for local aid and education, and his jobs record trailed most other states.

If, however, you prefer context to overkill, here are some things to consider. Yes, Romney made some budget reductions that hurt, but he was governing in a time of a sluggish economy and fiscal problems. And so, like governors of all ideological stripes, he cut spending.

But here’s the more instructive point, given the no-new-net-revenues stance Romney and the national GOP have taken regarding our national fiscal problems: Romney did about a third of his first-year budget balancing through new revenues. According to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, he raised around $750 million in new revenue for his first budget, half through a long list of fee increases, half through what he called corporate-loophole closings — but which someone more committed to linguistic precision would label business tax hikes.

“By and large they were changes in tax policy,” says Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation. “One can argue the merits, but they were overall tax increases.”

The two sides also battled over respective jobs records. Romney’s surrogates claimed, as Romney himself has bragged, that he created more jobs as Bay State governor than Obama has nationally. This is an area where it’s easy to fit facts to one’s favored storyline, so here are the most relevant data: According to the Taxpayers Foundation, the state added about 20,000 private-sector jobs during Romney’s four years; as of April, there were 35,000 net new private sector jobs since Obama took office. (At a comparable time under Romney, the state economy had added some 10,600 total non-farm jobs.)

What renders the president’s overall job picture negative is the 600,000 or so public-sector jobs that have been lost. Although liberals may lament the public-sector loss, one would think conservatives would be more focused on the private-sector figures.

But honestly, the jobs comparison doesn’t tell you much that’s truly useful. Why? Because the idea that governors are responsible, beyond the margins, for the job creation or job loss in their states is misplaced. It was mostly fiction in 1988 when Michael Dukakis ran for president on the so-called Massachusetts Miracle and it’s mostly fiction now. A president’s policies have more overall economic effect than a governor’s, but even on a national level, many other factors are at play.

So how to judge Romney as governor? Certainly he doesn’t rank with Bill Weld or Mike Dukakis, the two governors who define the modern era in Massachusetts. But he was hardly a dismal failure, as Obama chief strategist David Axelrod and yesterday’s supporting cast charged. He was an above-average state CEO, but could have been considerably better if he hadn’t turned his focus nationally so early in his single term. He dealt reasonably well with tough fiscal challenges. And as he showed on Romneycare, when he set his mind to something, he could get big things done.

But count on this: You won’t hear much about his signature achievement on the campaign trail. Not from Romney, anyway.

 The Boston Globe

 

So what about Mitt’s experience with the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic games? Wikipedia has made this assessment in the article which follows below:
 

2002 - Romney addresses Salt Lake City Olympic Committee . . .

Desert News - Salt Lake City

 

The Salt Lake Games faced a bribery scandal and some local opposition during the bid, as well as some sporting and refereeing controversies during the competitions. Nevertheless, from sporting and business standpoints, they were among the most successful Winter Olympiads in history; records were set in both the broadcasting and marketing programs. Over 2 billion viewers watched more than 13 billion viewer hours.  The games were also financially successful raising more money with fewer sponsors than any prior Olympic Games, which left SLOC with a surplus of $40 million at the conclusion of the games. The surplus was used to create the Utah Athletic Foundation, which maintains and operates many of the remaining Olympic venues.

Wikipedia

 

During the 2012 Presidential campaign the “US Olympic Committee” has released a statement asking the candidates to leave the games out of the politics.  The Following story expresses:

 

U.S. Olympic Committee wants Olympics footage out of campaign ads

July 26, 2012|By Melanie Mason

 

The U.S. Olympic Committee has a message for the presidential candidates and their supporters: leave the Games out of your politics.

The committee today panned an ad released Wednesday by Priorities USA Action, the "super PAC" supporting President Obama, which made ample use of old Olympics footage of Mitt Romney at the 2002 Winter Olympics. The spot poked fun at Romney’s international investments and pointedly referred to foreign countries where Romney’s private equity firm, Bain Capital, helped create jobs.

That was not exactly in line with the Olympic spirit, at least according to the USOC.

"The Olympic Games are a celebration of friendship, excellence and respect. While we are absolutely confident that neither presidential candidate nor campaign has participated in the production or distribution of these negative ads, the attacks, using Olympic themes and images, need to stop,” said USOC spokesman Patrick Sandusky in a statement.

“Tomorrow we will celebrate America's finest athletes' accomplishments and watch Team USA march in the parade of nations,” Sandusky added. “For anything even remotely negative to be associated with that time-honored, inspirational moment would be extremely unfortunate.”

Olympics footage is not just off-limits for attack ads. Sandusky specified the ban “pertains to all ads. We will not allow Olympic footage to be used in any political ad, positive or negative, per the IOC's Olympic Charter."

The restriction may spell bad news for Mitt Romney and his supporters, who point to Romney’s stewardship of the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympics as a key biographical selling point in his presidential campaign.

His campaign has already used Olympics imagery at least once – a Web video from last December, called “Leader,” refers to his involvement in the Games and features a shot of Romney decked out in Olympics gear.

The USOC will ask candidates to stop running any ads that include Olympics footage; it will also ask YouTube to take such ads down.

 

The Romney campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

As for Priorities USA, it will still run ads in four battleground states during the Olympics, but it will sub in a spot unveiled last month which hammers Romney for layoffs at an Indiana factory that occurred when his private equity firm, Bain Capital, took over.

“When we were assured Mitt Romney and his allies would be held to the same standard, we were more than happy to take the ad down,” said Bill Burton, co-founder of the liberal super PAC.

The Los Angeles Times

So now what about the infamous “Bain Capitol”?  What is it and what is it’s purpose?  Wikipedia defines:

Bain Capital is a Boston-headquartered alternative asset management and financial services company that specializes in private equity, venture capital, credit and public market investments. Bain invests across a broad range of industry sectors and geographic regions. As of early 2012, the firm managed approximately $66 billion of investor capital across its various investment platforms.

 

The firm was founded in 1984 by partners from the consulting firm Bain & Company. Since inception it has invested in or acquired hundreds of companies including AMC Entertainment, Aspe Education Group, Brookstone, Burger King, Burlington Coat Factory, Clear Channel Communications, Domino's Pizza, DoubleClick, Dunkin' Donuts, D&M Holdings, Guitar Center, Hospital Corporation of America (HCA), Sealy, The Sports Authority, Staples, Toys "R" Us, Warner Music Group and The Weather Channel.

 

As of the end of 2011, Bain Capital had approximately 400 professionals, most with previous experience in consulting, operations or finance. Bain is headquartered at the John Hancock Tower in Boston, Massachusetts with additional offices in New York City, Chicago, Palo Alto, London, Luxembourg, Munich, Mumbai, Hong Kong, Shanghai and Tokyo.

Wikipedia

I have to say that Bain Capital sounds nothing like the villainous raiders the Obama administration as described them and the candidate Romney as.  Bain has helped many American companies secure their needed capital and many are business American families use from time to time.  The Obama campaign has leveled a number of serious charges at Romney and Bain to which the candidate has given the following answers:

 

Obama’s False Attacks

Team Romney | June 12, 2012

 

OBAMA MYTH: Destroying companies

REALITY: Governor Romney’s private sector record is one of success and turnaround, despite many investments in companies that were failing at the time.

Eighty percent of the companies Bain Capital has invested in from its founding to today have grown revenues. When companies grow, they are able to hire more workers and our economy grows.

Bain Capital pursued an investment strategy that often included targeting companies in decline and trying to turn them around. In most cases, it held the companies for many years and invested a significant amount of human and financial capital into improving operations to help revive these struggling companies.

When President Obama attacks Governor Romney’s record in the private sector, he’s also attacking our country’s greatest engine for job creation: the free enterprise system.

OBAMA MYTH: Rich businessmen profited most from the firm’s investments.

REALITY: The major investment beneficiaries of Mitt Romney’s work in private equity – and private equity in general – are the investors in the fund.

The investors include pension funds, charities, and universities. In fact, over half the money invested in private equity is from pension funds and charitable foundations alone. The success of private equity investments helps provide secure retirements for seniors, allows charities to serve their communities, and provides universities with the resources they need to educate our youth.

In addition, state and local governments depend on higher returns from private equity investments to fund employee retirements without cutting into operating budgets. When investments don’t perform, state and local governments must offset gaps in investment returns by using tax dollars otherwise spent on local programs. In California, for example, one study has shown that a 0.25% decrease in investment returns could cost local municipalities and school districts $300 million per year. That’s $300 million less being spent on vital local programs.

When private equity succeeds, it is not just companies that thrive -- it is retirees, charities, local communities, and universities that benefit the most.

OBAMA MYTH: Bankrupting a successful steel mill in Kansas City, MO.

REALITY: The GS Technologies plant that Barack Obama has used to attack Mitt Romney was scheduled to be closed if Romney and his colleagues hadn’t bought the plant and tried to help turn it around.

In 1993, GS Technologies, a company Bain Capital had invested in, purchased a struggling Kansas City steel plant from Armco. Prior to this investment, Armco announced plans to close the Kansas City plant if a buyer could not be found.

This investment – and $170 million in upgrades – kept the Kansas City plant competitive in a tough international market and saved the steel workers’ jobs for eight years.

Two years after Mitt Romney left Bain Capital, the GS Technologies plant was closed because of foreign steel dumping into the U.S. market. Thirty-one other steel companies declared bankruptcy during the same period.

During his three and a half years in office, President Obama has consistently failed to take the steps necessary to protect American manufacturing from unfairly-subsidized Chinese imports. On day one, President Romney will designate China a currency manipulator and take the steps necessary to make American manufacturing competitive again.

OBAMA MYTH: Shutting down a successful paper plant in Marion, IN.

REALITY: The paper plant in Marion, IN was losing money when Ampad bought it to try to turn it around.

In 1992, Bain Capital invested in American Paper & Pad, or Ampad. Two years later – while Governor Romney was on a leave of absence to run for U.S. Senate against the late Ted Kennedy – Ampad purchased the assets of an unprofitable plant in Marion, Indiana from Smith Corona.

This was not a healthy plant: In the year preceding Ampad’s purchase, the Marion plant lost more than $1.6 million dollars.

Though the Marion plant would later close, Ampad added nearly 2,500 jobs at other plants between Bain Capital’s initial investment and the sale of its majority interest. During this same period, revenues grew dramatically from $8.8 million to more than $580 million.

OBAMA MYTH: A “Corporate Raider”

FACT: Even President Obama’s supporters acknowledge this isn’t true. Steve Rattner, President Obama’s former car czar, said that Governor Romney was the “furthest thing” from a corporate raider. Governor Deval Patrick rejected the characterization of Bain Capital as a raider and said that Bain was a “perfectly fine company” with “a role in the private economy.” The truth is that Governor Romney wasn’t tearing down companies; he was building up strong companies like Staples, Sports Authority, Steel Dynamics, and Bright Horizons. This accusation is yet another failed attempt to smear Governor Romney’s “sterling” private sector record, and even President Obama’s supporters reject it.

OBAMA MYTH: Shipping Jobs Overseas

FACT: Under Governor Romney’s leadership, Bain Capital invested in over 100 companies. Of those, President Obama’s campaign has accused three of shipping jobs overseas. In two of these cases, the accusations are related to events that occurred in 2000 and 2001, well after Governor Romney left Bain Capital in February 1999 to lead the Winter Olympics. In the third case, the share of domestic production actually increased, not decreased, during the time the Obama campaign points to. This attack is merely an attempt to distract voters from President Obama’s failed economic record and his refusal to stand up to China’s unfair trade practices.

OBAMA MYTH: Closing Stores And Laying Off Employees

FACT: Under Bain Capital’s ownership, Stage Stores doubled the number of employees and doubled the number of stores. During this time, Stage Stores added locations in Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa. Bain Capital sold its controlling interest in the company in 1997. Years later, Stage Stores filed for bankruptcy, but today it is a healthy business with 14,000 employees and hundreds of new stores nationwide.

 

Team Romney "Romney for President"

 

 

 

 

 VIEWS  FROM THE CONVENTION

 

Clint Eastwood  and  Dr. Condoleezza Rice

Kid Rock 

Mitt Romney

 

 

The Convention Floor

Con. Paul Ryan and Gov. Chris Christie

 

 

 

 

Massachusetts Delegates

 

Five Takeaways From Thursday

At The Republican Convention

Categories: 2012, Republicans

by Mark Memmott - npr

       

Mitt and Ann Romney (center) are surrounded by family members and balloons at the end of the 2012 Republican National Convention on Thursday in Tampa.

If you missed some of Thursday's action at the Republican National Convention, when Mitt Romney accepted his party's presidential nomination, we were live blogging here and you can always read through it to see how the day and evening went.

But if you'd like to save some time, here are five things that struck us (skip to the end if you only want to read about Clint Eastwood):

— It's Not You, It's Him: From the start of the evening through Mitt Romney's acceptance speech there was a common message for those Americans who voted for Barack Obama in 2008: That's OK, you shouldn't feel bad — it's Obama who failed. Romney himself put it this way:

"How many days have you woken up feeling that something really special was happening in America? Many of you felt that way on Election Day four years ago. Hope and Change had a powerful appeal. But tonight I'd ask a simple question: If you felt that excitement when you voted for Barack Obama, shouldn't you feel that way now that he's President Obama? You know there's something wrong with the kind of job he's done as president when the best feeling you had was the day you voted for him."

— Romney's Faith Is Something To Be Celebrated: The former Massachusetts governor could become the first Mormon to be elected president. So far in the campaign, most stories about that have focused on whether some voters might be uncomfortable because they're unfamiliar with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Up to now, the candidate and his campaign hadn't talked much about his faith. Tonight, they had friends tell about how he helped them through truly heartbreaking times.

"It seems to me when it comes to loving our neighbor, we can talk about it, or we can live it. The Romneys live it every single day," said a tearful Pam Finlayson, after talking about how Romney and his wife, Ann, helped and consoled her following the death of her daughter.

— It's Also OK To Talk About Bain Capital: Romney has taken a lot of incoming fire from the Obama campaign for his record as head of an investment firm that put money into some winners and created jobs — but also backed some losers that closed and cost workers their livelihoods. Tom Stemberg, the founder of one company that Bain helped get started — Staples — turned the issue back on Democrats: "You have to ask yourself: Why would an administration that can't create any jobs demonize someone who did? I've got a theory. I think when it comes to jobs, new businesses, and economic growth — they just don't get it. They say that Mitt Romney is out of touch with ordinary Americans. They just don't get it."

— Some Love From Brother Bush: Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, departing from his prepared remarks, used the start of his address to the convention to honor his father (former President George H.W. Bush) and his brother (former President George W. Bush). It was one of only a few moments this week when George W. was spoken about from the podium, and his brother's words brought the delegates to their feet. "I love him," Jeb Bush said, and George W. "kept us safe" during "incredibly challenging times."

— Clint Eastwood Said What? It was easily one of the more bizarre moments in recent political conventions history. Actor/director/American legend Clint Eastwood came onstage to offer his support for Romney. He did it with what appeared to be a bit of improv theater: a "conversation" with President Obama, who was represented by an empty chair. For those in the Tampa Bay Times Forum, it was hard to understand what Eastwood was saying. According to a transcript put together by NPR's Padmananda Rama, and from what we could hear from our seat in the rafters, among the lines Dirty Harry said were:

— On the night Obama was elected "I just thought, this is great. Everybody's crying. Oprah was crying. I was even crying. And then finally — I haven't cried that hard since I found out that there is 23 million unemployed people in this country."

— "What do you want me to tell Romney? I can't tell him to do that. ... He can't do that to himself. You're crazy. You're absolutely crazy. You're getting as bad as Biden."

— Vice President Biden is "just kind of a grin with a body behind it."

— "You could still use the plane. Though maybe a smaller one. Not that big gas guzzler when you're going around to colleges and talking about student loans and stuff like that."

— "I'd just like to say something, ladies and gentlemen. Something that I think is very important. It is that, you, we, we own this country."

— "We don't have to be — what I'm saying, we don't have to be ... masochists and vote for somebody that we don't really even want in office just because they seem to be nice guys or maybe not so nice guys if you look at some of the recent ads going out there. I don't know."

Well, Mr. Eastwood, with that we think we'll call it a day. Or a convention. Or a night. Or whatever. We don't know. Now it's on to Charlotte, N.C., where the Democrats get together next week.
npr

In conclusion; we have asked the simple questions about the "Romney Resume" and have reviewed some favorable and positive results.  If I had to rate or grade his performance I would give Willard Milton "Mitt" Romney an "A" + + + .  Go to the Romney site and read his economic plans!  I'm Felicity and you have been with the Noodleman Group. 

 

The Politician or the business man; or the business of politics!

                                                                               

 

 

* Images and photographs for this article; courtesy of "Google Images", 

 

the "Boston Globe" ,

 

the Salt Lake City "Desert News" and

 

Team Romney.



 

 

 

 

* “The Noodleman Group” is pleased to announce that we are now carrying a link to the “USA Today” news site. We installed the “widget/gadget” August 20, and it will be carried as a regular feature on our site. Now you can read“Noodleman” and then check in to “USA Today” for all the up to date News, Weather, Sports and more! Just scroll all the way down to the bottom of our site and hit the “USA Today” hyperlinks. Enjoy!

 

The Noodleman Group is on Google "Blogger"!