dagblog - Comments for "Pure Speculation on Bain and Romney"

The NYT says Romney has been

NCD — Sat, 14 Jul 2012 03:38:48 +0000

In reply to Pure Speculation on Bain and Romney

The NYT says Romney has been banking millions from Bain at least through 2009, if the 'nail ladies' don't 'get' it, it may be because they no longer get paid when they quit a job. I suppose he could also deny he knew he was part of an investment group making money disposing of dead fetuses, a medical waste company called Stericycle, see David Corn at Motherjones.

It is quite possible that Romney might have to spend 3 years 24/7 to supervise a two week long Olympics, you can't 'fire' nations or Olympic athletes, or outsource them to China. But with his obsession for Bain and his fortune it seems unlikely. I would wager Jimmy Carter could have handled the Olympics, Bain AND have gotten bin Laden without breaking a sweat.

A Venn diagram at Tumblr sums up a lot of facts about Romney and some personalities in the movies:

The Romney Proxy!

Michael Maiello — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 19:42:27 +0000

In reply to I found this statement

The Romney Proxy!

I found this statement

Beetlejuice — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 19:27:28 +0000

In reply to Pure Speculation on Bain and Romney

I found this statement interesting ...

" ... were Bain's managing directors not willing to eat their own dog food ... "

Given what we've been reading and hearing about Romney, I wonder if all the subtle hinting he plays both ends against the middle for personal gain and profit are in fact honest to the point where those managing director's knew Romney kept aces up his sleeves and would turn on a dime against them if there was a dollar to be made in the transaction, thus leaving them high, dry and deeply in debt.

I'm saying, he sells the businsness to them, which they go into hock to purchase using the business as colateral, only to discover a few months later there were issues they never knew about that only Romney handled and never told them or included them in on it, which hits them hard in the pocketbook requiring they off load the busines and there's Romney waiting to buy it back at a cut-rate firesale.

Another possibility, more

Michael Maiello — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 18:52:40 +0000

In reply to Destor, Fun read, nothing

Another possibility, more damaging -- it took him 3 years of conniving to design a tax strategy around his liquidity event.

Destor, Fun read, nothing

Bruce Levine — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 18:47:07 +0000

In reply to Pure Speculation on Bain and Romney

Destor,

Fun read, nothing like pure speculation in a political season! Of course, your speculation has the advantage of making sense, and certainly is justified in response to the explanations coming from Bain and the Romney campaign respectively. Bain's explanation, as I understand it, is that Romney remained a titular head so that the transaction could be completed. But, as you point out, at least implicitly, there has to be a reason that ownership gets transferred in stages over several years (and Romney holding onto his interest as collateral makes sense). And the campaign's argument, that he remained titular head but was not involved in running the business, even if true, belies their principal argument that Romney didn't benefit from Bain after February of 1999 or so.

Seems to me this is another example of the cover-up being far worse than any crime. I mean if the guy was helping to effect a leveraged buyout of his interest in Bain after 1999, or if there was another reason why his ownership interest remained the same after 1999, then why didn't he just admit that from the get-go. Take your lumps about "vulture" capitalism and move on; your base wouldn't care, and the press would have been bored of this story by now.

That's a subtle and

Doctor Cleveland — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 17:49:38 +0000

In reply to Pure Speculation on Bain and Romney

That's a subtle and thoughtful point, destor. Thanks.

On a simpler, crudely populist note, I think that saying, "I didn't work there any more! I just owned the company!" is really not a winner.