Romney is being exposed by the Obama campaign.  Romney needs to be exposed.  Right now he's running on whiteness not substance.  He will not show his tax returns.  He has a lot to hide...And much of it revolves around Bain.  Bain and Romney are being exposed for their warfare against the working class.  His tax returns showing there were years in which he "legally" paid NO taxes, even though he made millions.  the interesting thing here is that it is Forbes that has posed the 35 questions he must answer.  RGN
 

35 Questions Mitt Romney Must Answer About Bain Capital Before The Issue Can Go Away

TJ Walker , Subscriber
thanks for correcting.

+ Comment now

Mitt Romney conducted numerous TV and other media interviews yesterday in order to minimize the damage his campaign has received regarding discrepancies surrounding his tenure at Bain


During times of crisis it is often a smart strategy to give virtually unlimited access to the media in order to push out your message aggressively and satisfy reporter curiosity so that the issue can be pushed off the front burner. John McCain famously did this well earlier in his career when dealing with his own Keating Five controversies.

Unfortunately for the Romney Campaign, the slew of TV interviews did little to satisfy the media. In times of crisis, a strong candidate will come up with answers that satisfy the basic questions surrounding the controversy and will make people want to move on to another subject. Romney, however, could not seem to come up with basic messages that resolved the controversies. Many of his answers seemed evasive or overly legalistic. The biggest problem for Romney is that all of his interviews have only increased the questions that political observers, voters and the media have regarding the subject of Bain Capital.

Specifically, Romney is going to have to answer the following 35 questions before this issue subsides:

1. Are you contending that an individual can simultaneously be the CEO, president, managing director of a company, and its sole stockholder and somehow be “disassociated” from the company or accurately classified as someone not having “any” formal involvement with a company?

2. You have stated that in “Feb. 1999 I left Bain capital and all management responsibility” and “I had no ongoing activity or involvement.” It depends on what the definition of “involvement” is, doesn’t it? Clearly you were involved with Bain to the extent that you owned it. Are you defining “involvement” in a uniquely specific way that only means “full-time, active, 60-hours-a-week, hands-on manager?”

3. How exactly are you defining “involvement?”

For the other questions and full article.

The main tool being used by Romney, Republicans, Faux News, and right wing talk radio is the  LIE!!!!  To lie is the raison d'etre for Rush Limbaugh, the head of the Republican party.  Because this faction cannot tolerate having a black man as President, there is an urgency that he be replaced to restore the hegemony of white nationalism.  With its adherents having mainly a Southern base, the legacy of white supremacy remains a salient force.   The National Rifle Association provides a cloak for the most hyperbolic and violent of this faction.  To facilitate this agenda, this extreme agenda, conservatives must lie.  

The Obama presidency represents an attempt at fairness.  Fairness is a fundamental American value.  White nationalism is not about fairness. White nationalism is about maintaining white domination.  Having a black man as president represents a challenge to white nationalist hegemony.  Gaining back a white leader must be done by any means necessary, including lying. Like Limbaugh, to turn reality on its head, requires a lie.  Reason is not likely to be sufficient.  Rationality does not inspire passion, racist lies do!

Unfortunately, the issue on lying about Obama is not just about Romney, the person.   The Republican right wing has been on this white nationalist campaign against Obama throughout his presidency.   From Joe Wilson's "you lie" to Mitch McConnell's vow to make Obama a one term President,  lying about Obama has been central to their narrative.   The article below by Michael Cohen spells out Romney's use of the lie in his bid to defeat President Barack Obama.  RGN

Romney's Bid to Become Liar-in-Chief

By Michael Cohen, Guardian UK

22 June 12

our years ago, when I was writing about the 2008 presidential campaign, I wrote with dismay and surprise at the spate of falsehoods coming out of John McCain's campaign for president. McCain had falsely accused his opponent Barack Obama of supporting "comprehensive sex education" for children, and of wanting to raise taxes on the middle class, while his running mate, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, took credit for opposing the so-called "Bridge to Nowhere", which she had actually supported.

At the time, such false and misleading claims from a presidential candidate seemed shocking: they crossed an unstated line in American politics – going from the usual garden-variety campaign exaggeration to wilful lying.

Ah, those were the days … after watching Mitt Romney run for president the past few months, he makes John McCain look like George Washington (of "I Can't Tell A Lie" fame).

Granted, presidential candidates are no strangers to disingenuous or overstated claims; it's pretty much endemic to the business. But 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.

Now, in general, those of us in the pundit class are really not supposed to accuse politicians of lying – they mislead, they embellish, they mischaracterize, etc. Indeed, there is natural tendency for nominally objective reporters, in particular, to stay away from loaded terms such as lying. Which is precisely why Romney's repeated lies are so effective. In fact, lying is really the only appropriate word to use here, because, well, Romney lies a lot. But that's a criticism you're only likely to hear from partisans.

My personal favorite in Romney's cavalcade of untruths is his repeated assertion that President Obama has apologized for America. In his book, appropriately titled "No Apologies", Romney argues the following:

"Never before in American history has its president gone before so many foreign audiences to apologize for so many American misdeeds, both real and imagined. It is his way of signaling to foreign countries and foreign leaders that their dislike for America is something he understands and that is, at least in part, understandable."

Nothing about this sentence is true.

President Obama never went around the world and apologized for America – and yet, even after multiple news organizations have pointed out this is a "pants on fire" lie, Romney keeps making it. Indeed, the "Obama apology tour", along with the president bowing down to the King of Saudi Arabia, are practically the lodestars of the GOP's criticism of Obama's foreign policy performance (the Saudi thing isn't true either).

But foreign policy is a relatively light area of mistruth for the GOP standard-bearer. The economy is really where the truth takes its greatest vacation in Romney world. First, there is Romney's claim that the 2009 stimulus passed by Congress and signed by President Obama "didn't work". According to Romney, "that stimulus didn't put more private-sector people to work." While one can quibble over whether the stimulus went far enough, the idea that it didn't create private-sector jobs has no relationship to reality. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the stimulus bill created more than 3m jobs – a view shared by 80% of economists polled by the Chicago Booth School of Business (only 4% disagree).

The full article

America's white nationalist tendencies run deep.  If we only had Ron Walters here expound on his specialty, America's white nationalism.  Since the 1960s and even before, except in the Jim Crow South,  blatant racism outside the bounds of polite society.  There came a time when the white supremacist caricatures were no longer appropriate, much less for common display.  With Barack Obama as America's 44th President those caricatures are back in full display.  In 2010, Barack Obama is pictured as a witch doctor with bone through his nose. In terms of a blatant despicable racism, the white supremacy re dux.  It's hard to be more racist.


Moreover, the depths of this racism is shown when they degrade the office of the presidency.  The honor that is to be bestowed to that office does not apply when the occupant is black.  In other words, blackness trumps the prestige of the office with Barack Obama as its incumbent.  


The sign at this restaurant says it all.  Kanye West had to apologize for his comment that "President Bush does not like black people."  Ted Nugent referred to the President as vile.  He did get a visit from the Secret Service but there has been no sanction.  The President is called the most vile insult that cam be hurled at a black person.  No sanction.  RGN

Sign Uses Racial Slur to Refer to President

Updated: Monday, 23 Apr 2012, 8:18 PM EDT
Published : Monday, 23 Apr 2012, 5:44 PM ED

Julia Reynolds

PAULDING COUNTY, Ga. - Residents are upset about a sign in Paulding County that uses a racial slur to refer to President Barack Obama. The sign, in front of the Georgia Peach Oyster Bar on Highway 113, uses the n-word to refer to President Obama. “This world is supposed to be a peaceful world, not a world with hatred. This shouldn't be here today,” said Carl Norman.


The full article  

Trayvon Martin: The President Weighs In

The tragedy of Trayvon Martin is the outrage that incensed Black America.   The killing of a black teenager, in which the killer is not even questioned, is such an indignity that a movement has been born.   This is the Emmett Till case in the time of social media.  In addition to the social media, there are now black voices in mainstream media who can articulate the pain of what it means to be Trayvon Martin.  As said: "We are Trayvon Martin!"  With Reverend Al at the forefront of this struggle as activist/journalist, he challenges and reports.  There are other voices, as well:  Melissa Harris-Perry; Michael Eric Dyson; Mark Thompson, Joe Madison, Charles Blow,  Karen Finney, Jonathon Capehart, and many other blacks who provide an inner voice on the meaning of Trayvon Martin.   It took the President to say:  If I had a son he would have looked like Trayvon.

The President's Remarks

The Koch Right Wing Conspiracy!!!

Bill Press has a new book The Obama Hate Machine: The Lies, Distortions and Personal Attacks on the President -- and Who's Behind Them.  Press finds that at the root of most of these attacks are the Koch Brothers of Wichita, Kansas.  Since they are fellow Wichitans, there is a special embarrassment.  That said,  Bill in his new book exposes them as the main force that is funding the anti-Obama propaganda machine.  RGN                    

Koch brothers driving anti-Obama hate machine

Written on February 7, 2012

By Bill Press
Tribune Media Services


“If not now, when?” It’s one of the most famous maxims of history, attributed to the great Rabbi Hillel, who’s also credited with a down-to-earth version of the Golden Rule: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. This is the whole Torah; all the rest is commentary.”

Now, here’s your trivia question for the day: Who in our time revived that call to action with the challenge: “If not us, who? If not now, when?” Michael Moore? Barack Obama? Leaders of Occupy Wall Street?

No, not even close. Hillel’s urgent plea “If not now, when?” was appropriated by oil billionaires Charles and David Koch in a letter of invitation summoning CEOs to a fundraising summit in Rancho Mirage, Calif., in January 2011. It was imperative that they join forces, explained Charles Koch, “…to combat what is now the greatest threat to American freedom and prosperity in our lifetimes” — the administration of Barack Obama.

This was not the first such meeting called by the Koch Brothers. They’d been holding semi-annual gatherings of corporate barons since 2003, sprinkled with right-wing journalists, politicians, and Supreme Court justices. Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas sat in. So did Jim DeMint, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Chris Christie and Rick Perry. Conservative pundits Charles Krauthammer, Michael Barone and Glenn Beck shed any pretense of objectivity to attend and wow the crowd of executives representing many of America’s biggest corporations: the Bechtel Group, the Fluor Corporation, Georgia-Pacific, Home Depot, Wells Fargo, the Blackstone Group, Circuit City, and Laredo Petroleum, among others.


Nor was this, as Charles Koch described it, just an innocent gathering of “some of America’s greatest philanthropists and job creators.” No, this was a meeting to line up corporate opposition to President Obama’s re-election — and a very successful one. Corporations attending the Rancho Mirage summit pledged $49 million for the 2012 anti-Obama campaign. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg of what the Koch brothers have raised and pumped into politics over the last 20 years.

For the full article