Mitt Romney's 9 worst clueless-rich-man gaffes
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,429
Leadership quality? You be the judge:
http://news.yahoo.com/mitt-romneys-9-wo ... 00227.html
The GOP presidential contender is among the nation's wealthiest Americans — and he keeps reminding voters by sticking his well-heeled foot in his mouth
"For Mitt Romney, ad-libbing is becoming a liability," says Reid Epstein at Politico. When the normally on-script Romney makes off-the-cuff remarks, the result is often one "YouTube-worthy moment" after another, readymade for attack ads from his GOP presidential rivals or President Obama's campaign. And the super wealthy "Romney's gaffes are almost always related to his economic status," says David Weigel at Slate. Let's call it "Romneying," or making "unforced references to one's own economic success." Here, nine of the best (or worst) "Romneyisms":
1. He pals around with NASCAR team owners
NASCAR races tend to be fertile ground for Republican presidential candidates, so Romney went to the (rain-delayed) inaugural race of the NASCAR season, the Daytona 500, on Feb. 26. When an AP reporter asked Mitt if he follows NASCAR, Romney replied: "Not as closely as some of the most ardent fans. But I have some great friends that are NASCAR team owners." Ooof, says Slate's Weigel. "The reference to 'ardent fans' would have been enough; the reminder that he sups among the super-rich was totally gratuitous."
SEE MORE: Romney on the precipice
2. His wife drives "a couple of Cadillacs"
Speaking to the Detroit Economic Club on Feb. 24, Romney went off-script to speak of his love for his home state, where the cars are made in Detroit and "the trees are the right height." Mitt was also quick to remind the crowd that he drives Michigan-made cars — a Ford Mustang and a Chevy pickup — and that his wife "drives a couple of Cadillacs." Considering the Motor City's high poverty rate, bragging about owning two $35,000-plus Caddies is "rich, literally," says Charles Blow in The New York Times.
SEE MORE: 5 factors behind Mitt Romney's Michigan 'comeback'
3. He's not concerned about the very poor
Elated over his campaign-saving victory in the Florida primary, Romney interrupted his victory lap on Feb. 1 to tell CNN's Soledad O'Brien: "I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there." His consultants must have been "gnashing their teeth at this remark," says Ed Kilgore at Washington Monthly. Regardless of the broader point he was trying to make, "it's this tone-deafness that makes a lot of Republicans nervous about Mitt Romney as a general-election candidate."
SEE MORE: Mitt Romney's disputed CPAC and Maine wins: What they mean
4. He thinks $374,000 is "not very much" money
On Jan. 17, after a week of hounding from his GOP rivals and the media, Romney agreed to release his tax returns. The former private-equity businessman continues to make most of his income from investments, but also noted that he gets "speakers' fees from time to time, but not very much." The problem is that "not very much" was $374,000 last year, says Michael Gerson in The Washington Post. It's great the Romney's wealthy, but if he wants to win, he has to stop talking about money "as though engaged in a discussion with his stockbroker."
SEE MORE: The Romney revolt: Has the GOP base turned on him?
5. He likes "being able to fire people"
On Jan. 9, Romney talked up his prescription for health insurance reform, suggesting that insurance policies shouldn't necessarily be tied to your employer. That means, he said, "if you don't like what [insurers] do, you could fire them. I like being able to fire people who provide services to me." The bit about firing people was immediately ripped out of context, says Jonathan Capehart in The Washington Post, but it doesn't help that "the look on Romney's face when he says this line is right out of evil-boss-man central casting."
SEE MORE: Mitt Romney's Cadillacs boast: Gaffe or 'brilliant pander'?
6. He claims to have feared the pink slip
A day earlier, on Jan. 8, Romney commiserated with a group of New Hampshire voters, saying that he knows what it's like to "worry whether you're going to get fired," and that when he first started working in finance, "there were a couple of times I wondered whether I was going to get a pink slip." That set up Texas Gov. Rick Perry's best line of his (now defunct) campaign: "Now I have no doubt that Mitt Romney was worried about pink slips — whether he was going to have enough of them to hand out."
SEE MORE: Will Mitt Romney's 'pro-rich' tax plan revive his campaign?
7. He casually bets $10,000
Perry and Romney had a pretty heated exchange at the Dec. 10 GOP debate in Des Moines, Iowa. Perry claimed that Romney was trying to bury his past support for health insurance mandates, and when he wouldn't back down, Romney stuck out his hand and said: "Rick, I'll tell you what. Ten thousand bucks? Ten thousand dollar bet?" That was a "huge unforced error" that played right to Romney's greatest vulnerability: He "seems rich, elite, and out of touch," says Mark McKinnon at The Daily Beast.
SEE MORE: Can crossover Democrats sink Mitt Romney in Michigan?
8. He believes corporations are people
About a month before Occupy Wall Street came into existence, Romney was challenged by hecklers at the Iowa State Fair on Aug. 11. When Romney said he opposed raising taxes to pay for entitlement programs, a man shouted out "Corporations!" Undaunted, Romney shot back: "Corporations are people, my friend.... Of course they are. Everything corporations earn also goes to people." At least "'Corporations are people, my friend' makes a nice bumper sticker" for giggling progressives, says David Dayen at Firedoglake.
SEE MORE: Mitt Romney's plan to 'nuke Santorum': Will it work?
9. He jokes about being unemployed
Romney held a coffee chat with a group of Florida job-seekers last June, telling them, "I'm also unemployed." The unemployed voters laughed good-naturedly, but not everybody found the quip funny. Romney has a "gift for odd, awkward, delusional gaffes," says Tom Levenson at Balloon Juice. It's this kind of joke that will keep the "ridiculously wealthy Romney" from ever persuading "the common clay that his is just like the least among us." He shouldn't even try.
http://news.yahoo.com/mitt-romneys-9-wo ... 00227.html
The GOP presidential contender is among the nation's wealthiest Americans — and he keeps reminding voters by sticking his well-heeled foot in his mouth
"For Mitt Romney, ad-libbing is becoming a liability," says Reid Epstein at Politico. When the normally on-script Romney makes off-the-cuff remarks, the result is often one "YouTube-worthy moment" after another, readymade for attack ads from his GOP presidential rivals or President Obama's campaign. And the super wealthy "Romney's gaffes are almost always related to his economic status," says David Weigel at Slate. Let's call it "Romneying," or making "unforced references to one's own economic success." Here, nine of the best (or worst) "Romneyisms":
1. He pals around with NASCAR team owners
NASCAR races tend to be fertile ground for Republican presidential candidates, so Romney went to the (rain-delayed) inaugural race of the NASCAR season, the Daytona 500, on Feb. 26. When an AP reporter asked Mitt if he follows NASCAR, Romney replied: "Not as closely as some of the most ardent fans. But I have some great friends that are NASCAR team owners." Ooof, says Slate's Weigel. "The reference to 'ardent fans' would have been enough; the reminder that he sups among the super-rich was totally gratuitous."
SEE MORE: Romney on the precipice
2. His wife drives "a couple of Cadillacs"
Speaking to the Detroit Economic Club on Feb. 24, Romney went off-script to speak of his love for his home state, where the cars are made in Detroit and "the trees are the right height." Mitt was also quick to remind the crowd that he drives Michigan-made cars — a Ford Mustang and a Chevy pickup — and that his wife "drives a couple of Cadillacs." Considering the Motor City's high poverty rate, bragging about owning two $35,000-plus Caddies is "rich, literally," says Charles Blow in The New York Times.
SEE MORE: 5 factors behind Mitt Romney's Michigan 'comeback'
3. He's not concerned about the very poor
Elated over his campaign-saving victory in the Florida primary, Romney interrupted his victory lap on Feb. 1 to tell CNN's Soledad O'Brien: "I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there." His consultants must have been "gnashing their teeth at this remark," says Ed Kilgore at Washington Monthly. Regardless of the broader point he was trying to make, "it's this tone-deafness that makes a lot of Republicans nervous about Mitt Romney as a general-election candidate."
SEE MORE: Mitt Romney's disputed CPAC and Maine wins: What they mean
4. He thinks $374,000 is "not very much" money
On Jan. 17, after a week of hounding from his GOP rivals and the media, Romney agreed to release his tax returns. The former private-equity businessman continues to make most of his income from investments, but also noted that he gets "speakers' fees from time to time, but not very much." The problem is that "not very much" was $374,000 last year, says Michael Gerson in The Washington Post. It's great the Romney's wealthy, but if he wants to win, he has to stop talking about money "as though engaged in a discussion with his stockbroker."
SEE MORE: The Romney revolt: Has the GOP base turned on him?
5. He likes "being able to fire people"
On Jan. 9, Romney talked up his prescription for health insurance reform, suggesting that insurance policies shouldn't necessarily be tied to your employer. That means, he said, "if you don't like what [insurers] do, you could fire them. I like being able to fire people who provide services to me." The bit about firing people was immediately ripped out of context, says Jonathan Capehart in The Washington Post, but it doesn't help that "the look on Romney's face when he says this line is right out of evil-boss-man central casting."
SEE MORE: Mitt Romney's Cadillacs boast: Gaffe or 'brilliant pander'?
6. He claims to have feared the pink slip
A day earlier, on Jan. 8, Romney commiserated with a group of New Hampshire voters, saying that he knows what it's like to "worry whether you're going to get fired," and that when he first started working in finance, "there were a couple of times I wondered whether I was going to get a pink slip." That set up Texas Gov. Rick Perry's best line of his (now defunct) campaign: "Now I have no doubt that Mitt Romney was worried about pink slips — whether he was going to have enough of them to hand out."
SEE MORE: Will Mitt Romney's 'pro-rich' tax plan revive his campaign?
7. He casually bets $10,000
Perry and Romney had a pretty heated exchange at the Dec. 10 GOP debate in Des Moines, Iowa. Perry claimed that Romney was trying to bury his past support for health insurance mandates, and when he wouldn't back down, Romney stuck out his hand and said: "Rick, I'll tell you what. Ten thousand bucks? Ten thousand dollar bet?" That was a "huge unforced error" that played right to Romney's greatest vulnerability: He "seems rich, elite, and out of touch," says Mark McKinnon at The Daily Beast.
SEE MORE: Can crossover Democrats sink Mitt Romney in Michigan?
8. He believes corporations are people
About a month before Occupy Wall Street came into existence, Romney was challenged by hecklers at the Iowa State Fair on Aug. 11. When Romney said he opposed raising taxes to pay for entitlement programs, a man shouted out "Corporations!" Undaunted, Romney shot back: "Corporations are people, my friend.... Of course they are. Everything corporations earn also goes to people." At least "'Corporations are people, my friend' makes a nice bumper sticker" for giggling progressives, says David Dayen at Firedoglake.
SEE MORE: Mitt Romney's plan to 'nuke Santorum': Will it work?
9. He jokes about being unemployed
Romney held a coffee chat with a group of Florida job-seekers last June, telling them, "I'm also unemployed." The unemployed voters laughed good-naturedly, but not everybody found the quip funny. Romney has a "gift for odd, awkward, delusional gaffes," says Tom Levenson at Balloon Juice. It's this kind of joke that will keep the "ridiculously wealthy Romney" from ever persuading "the common clay that his is just like the least among us." He shouldn't even try.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"Try to not spook the horse."
-Neil Young
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
What about the other points made here?
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
one-liner? ... the guy was telling a story about how he was at an event he physically could not have been at ...
Yes, I suppose that could be said about any candidate. But this does illustrate, yet again how desperately we do need better candidates. But the point is, there are just too many gaffes here to brush aside. And look at who is at the receiving end of these gaffes. Who gets shafted by this kind of thinking? Most likely, you and me. Do we really want this kind of person to be our president?
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
The one about firing people is out of context, but most of these are fair game.
Reading Mitt's latest gaffe does make me smile while whiling away the day at my shitty job.
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
i'm referring to this ...
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/artic ... asn-t-born
Romney recalled he was “probably 4 or something like that” the day of the Golden Jubilee, when three-quarters of a million people gathered to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the American automobile.
....
And it took place June 1, 1946 — fully nine months before Romney was born.
I was responding to the OP and the article.
I think he'd be better than the other guy.
"what's sauce for the goose is now sauce for the gander." - Mittens Romney
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... he-gander/
should they have to?
really I drive a caddy I am poor
Cadillac is not a status symbol car of the very rich... even two :?
that's a little weird though where's the Jaguar or Benz ?
Mitt drives a truck and a mustang... keepin low profile
I think I shouldn't know any of this crap ...
seems policy and real issues don't make the news as much
as all this other junk the last year
reading that list I thought most could apply to any of the wealthy candidates
and aren't they all compared to you and I ?
Ya, and Obama marched on the Edmund-Pettus Bridge and Hillary dodged sniper fire at the airport....
Politicians lie...
It's stuff that he brings up all on his own. Nobody asked him if he wanted to bet $10,000 or how many Caddies his wife has - he volunteered it. People aren't digging this up; he's digging his own holes while he tries to act like a "commoner".
Phila, PA 4/28/16; Phila, PA 4/29/16; Fenway Park 8/7/16; Fenway Park 9/2/18; Asbury Park 9/18/21; Camden 9/14/22;
Las Vegas 5/16/24; Las Vegas 5/18/24; Phila, PA 9/7/24; Phila, PA 9/9/24; Baltimore Arena 9/12/24
Tres Mtns - TLA 3/23/11; EV - Tower Theatre 6/25/11; Temple of the Dog - Tower Theatre 11/5/16
And you've never bet someone $1,000,000 on something? Some of this is so stupid.
None of this has anything to do with how well he might run the country. Just another attempt at class warfare by a group of people that get votes from people by giving them stuff and keeping them in the need.
if that is the case, why the hell is it so hard to sue a corporation for damages when it harms people or the environment? individuals are found liable for things all the time, yet it is nearly impossible to sue a corporation and WIN. the supreme court is about to hear a case that is challenging the "corporations are people" contention, and how they rule on this new case could directly contradict the citizens united ruling....it is going to be interesting for sure....
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Excellent point! And of course you're question (which could be taken as a well phrased rhetorical question) could be answered, "Because that corporation is more than a Goliath, it's more like a Goliath- Collective." It's easier to win a law suit against an individual than it is against the Borg.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Generally, I agree with you, pjl44, but I think the point of the article is to make it clear what Romney's attitude is towards many of the people he wishes to represent. Flaunting ones wealth and giving the impression of not caring for the less fortunate- I think these are worth taking note of. I posted the article for that reason and no, we really don't need to spend a lot of time on this thread- there's more important work to be done. So yes, I agree with you that forming opinions on foreign policy, monetary policy, and economic policy are very important and deserve more of our time and consideration.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Corporate Immunity Looks Likely: Supreme Court Seems Ready To Side With Shell In Human Rights Suit
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/2 ... 06825.html
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday morning appeared divided along party lines, with a conservative majority ready to hold that corporations cannot be held accountable in federal courts for international human rights violations.
The Court was hearing oral argument in Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, which was brought under a founding-era law, commonly called the Alien Tort Statute, that allows foreign nationals to bring civil lawsuits in U.S. federal courts "for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States." The 12 Nigerian plaintiffs contend that Shell Oil's parent company aided and abetted the Nigerian government in its torture and extrajudicial killing of environmental and human rights protesters resisting Shell's operations in Nigeria in the 1990s.
The Alien Tort Statute says nothing about what types of defendants -- corporate, individual, state -- may be sued. In the past year, the four appeals courts to take on the issue of corporate liability have divided 3-to-1 in favor of those bringing the lawsuits. But Tuesday's oral argument reinforced the relevancy of another aspect of all these decisions: their partisan nature. Save one defection from each side, every Democrat-appointed judge held for corporate liability, and every Republican appointee found for corporate immunity.
At the very start of the Supreme Court's argument, Justice Anthony Kennedy said that "the case turns in large part" on Royal Dutch Petroleum's argument in its brief that "international law does not recognize corporate liability." He then pulled a quote from Chevron's brief in support of its fellow multinational oil company, which said, "No other nation in the world permits its court to exercise universal civil jurisdiction over alleged extraterritorial human rights abuses to which the nation has no connection."
"I was trying to find the best authority you have to refute that proposition," Kennedy told the Nigerians' lawyer, Paul Hoffman.
Hoffman responded that the United Kingdom and the Netherlands have somewhat similar laws on their books. Problem is, those two countries submitted briefs opposing Hoffman's position in this case.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Antonin Scalia also expressed hostility not only to the notion of corporate liability, but also to the Alien Tort Statute itself. This lawsuit, Alito noted, was brought by foreign plaintiffs against a foreign defendant for acts that took place in a foreign country. "What business does a case like that have in the courts of the United States?" he asked Hoffman.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg tried to push back against Alito's line of questioning, noting that the Supreme Court has already allowed such cases to be brought under the Alien Tort Statute. "I thought what we were talking about today, the question was, is it only individual defendants or are corporate defendants also liable," said Ginsburg.
In questioning Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler, who was arguing in support of the Nigerians, Roberts said, "Your argument seems to be that all you need to do is find an event -- torture, piracy, whatever -- and then it's up to the domestic law whether or not particular entities can be sued." That analysis, which Roberts summed up in a disapproving tone, was the reasoning used by the majorities of three lower courts to find for corporate liability.
Justice Stephen Breyer at first expressed skepticism about creating a "United States Supreme Court of the World," but then pivoted toward a position in favor of finding corporate liability. Objecting to the categorical rule adopted by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit that corporations may never be sued, Breyer said, "I seem to think possibly of counterexamples."
"Pirates Inc.," Breyer offered for consideration, implicitly noting that the Alien Tort Statute was originally passed in 1789 in part to allow suits arising from acts of piracy.
Breyer drew out his hypothetical for attorney Kathleen Sullivan, representing Royal Dutch Petroleum. "Do you think in the 18th century if [victims of piracy] brought [suit against] Pirates Inc., and we get all their gold, and Blackbeard gets up and he says, 'Oh, it isn't me, it's the corporation' -- do you think that [courts] would have said then, ‘Oh, I see, it's a corporation. Goodbye, go home'?"
"Justice Breyer, yes, the corporation would not be liable," Sullivan answered.
Relying on the principle articulated by Justice Kennedy at the start of the argument -- the same one endorsed by the Republican appointees in the lower courts -- Sullivan said that the plaintiffs "failed to show anything in custom or practice" to prove corporate liability for human rights abuses is an accepted international legal norm.
That is because all the international conventions and treaties Sullivan cited "are written to prohibit certain acts, and they don't talk about the actors," said Justice Elena Kagan.
"It's as if somebody came and said, 'This norm of international law does not apply to Norwegians,'" Kagan hypothesized. "But of course it applies to Norwegians because it prevents everybody from committing a certain kind of act."
Sullivan responded by arguing that some international law treaties, such as those banning terrorist financing and bribery of public officials, explicitly refuse to limit defendants to real people, whereas the "human rights offenses here" -- torture, extrajudicial killing, crimes against humanity -- "arise from conventions that speak to individual liability."
That answer did not satisfy Kagan. "All United States law and mostly in other countries' law would hold the corporation liable for the individual's act," she said. "That’s a general principle of law."
The back-and-forth between Sullivan and Kagan, which highlighted the irreconcilable, results-oriented divide between the two sides' arguments, ended as a stalemate between two career contemporaries: Each served as dean of one of the country's best law schools -- Sullivan at Stanford, Kagan at Harvard.
In the end, however, Sullivan appeared to have the Court's five-justice majority of Republican appointees on her side, if the typically silent Justice Clarence Thomas sticks to his previously expressed narrow views on the Alien Tort Statute and general pro-business bent.
A decision in the case is expected by the end of June.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
I hear ya. As Vitalogy Man pointed out with Clinton and Obama, if you spend that much time on the campaign trail it won't be particularly difficult to pull out quotes that make you want to punch a wall. I view this sorta stuff as minutia and always go back to this old Carlin bit when we start getting really cynical:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders."
It's easy to get worked up over these nimrods when we really need to look at ourselves and how we're making these decisions over and over again.
"Where do they come from? They Don't pass through the membrane of another reality."
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
There are very few comics who will actually crack your ego. He's the man.