GOP Congressman: Mitch McConnell is "the Marie Antoinette of the Senate"

After Donald Trump, the man who has done more damage to America and exhibited more disregard of the U.S. Constitution is the ever despicable (and self-enriching) Mitch McConnell.  Now, with states struggling financially with the impact of the coronavirus pandemic, McConnell has said that he would prefer that states go bankrupt rather than have the federal government provide financial assistance.  This, from the man who had no qualms giving away $1,5 trillion to the extremely wealthy and large corporations, exploding the federal deficit in the process.  Combined with McConnell's protection of Trump and putting the GOP above the country, McConnell deserves the nickname "Moscow Mitch."  He needs to be voted out of office and he and his wife investigated.  A piece in Salon looks at even a Republican calling McConnell out. A piece in Salon looks at McConnell's Marie Antoinette comparison (which probably is slanderous toward Marie Antoinette).  Here are excerpts:

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., caught fire from both parties after telling the conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt on Wednesday that he would rather see states declare bankruptcy — which they cannot do — than wait for expanded federal aid that would demand further deficit spending.

"We all have governors regardless of party who would love to have free money," McConnell said. "I think this whole business of additional assistance for state and local governments need to be thoroughly evaluated."

Hours later, Rep. Pete King, R-N.Y., publicly rebuked McConnell, calling his Republican colleague's remarks "indefensible."

"To say that it is 'free money' to provide funds for cops, firefighters and healthcare workers makes McConnell the Marie Antoinette of the Senate," King tweeted.

McConnell — who nicknamed himself the "Grim Reaper" — made the remarks the day after the Senate passed a relief bill that excluded the hundreds of billions of dollars in federal aid requested by a bipartisan coalition of governors.

"These continuing losses will force states and territories not only to make drastic cuts to the programs we depend on to provide economic security, educational opportunities, and public safety, but the national economic recovery will be dramatically hampered," Gov. Larry Hogan (R-MD), chairman of the National Governors Association, and Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-N.Y.), vice-chair, wrote in a joint letter to Congress last week.

Though McConnell said he prefers the bankruptcy route, President Donald Trump has said he wants to add a relief package for state and local governments in the next round of emergency funding.

McConnell's office published a press release to promote the interview, tossing off the requested funds as "blue-state bailouts," . . . . Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., put McConnell's colleagues on the spot Thursday morning, tweeting: "Republican Senators: Raise your hand if you think your state should go bankrupt."

King and Schumer both veterans of Congress  — King has represented parts of Long Island since 1993 — have teamed up against McConnell before. In the wake of last summer's mass shooting at a San Antonio Wal-Mart, the pair called on McConnell to call an emergency session to vote on a background check bill that passed in the lower chamber.

McConnell's Senate office could not be immediately reached for comment. His campaign redirected Salon's request to his Senate office.

Columba Bush - Another Maureen McDonnell?

With former Virginia first lady Maureen McDonnell sentenced last week to a year in prison - a far too light of a sentence in my view - for her role in the criminal corruption rampant at the Governor's mansion, some are speculating that Jeb Bush's wife has similar extravagant spending habits and issues with truth and veracity.  Obviously, the Bush clan has far more money that the McDonnells did, but some are none the less vetting Columba Bush.  Here are highlights from the Washington Post:

In 1999, Columba Bush, the famously private wife of then-Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, was detained and fined by federal customs officials for misrepresenting the amount of clothing and jewelry she had bought while on a solo five-day shopping spree in Paris.

The incident left the Florida first lady deeply mortified and her husband politically chagrined. Jeb Bush said the first lady had misled customs officials because she did not want him to know that she had spent about $19,000 on the trip.

The ordeal did not stop her from spending freely, however. Less than a year later, she took out a loan to buy $42,311.70 worth of jewelry on a single day, according to records filed with the state of Florida by Mayors Jewelers.

That purchase was part of a pattern by Columba Bush of borrowing to buy tens of thousands of dollars of jewelry at a time from the South Florida store over a 14-year period. Documentation available online, which does not include the details of two transactions made less than six weeks apart in 1995, shows that she spent a total of more than $90,000 at the store.

That kind of spending, though well within his means, may present a challenge for Jeb Bush as he prepares for a presidential run with a message that the playing field between rich and poor is not fair or level.

In recent years, candidates in both parties have had to answer questions about high-dollar transactions by themselves and their family members, whether a $400 haircut for John Edwards, six-figure speaking fees for Hillary Rodham Clinton, or the number of homes and cars Mitt Romney owned.
While spouses are not on the ballot, they too find their lifestyles the focus of curiosity — and, frequently, partisan attack.

During Bush’s two terms as governor, from 1999 to 2007, the first lady maintained a low profile, living much of the time in their Miami-area home rather than in the state capital, Tallahassee.

While the 2000 purchase listed the governor’s mansion as her home address, documents suggest that, on at least one earlier occasion, Columba Bush wanted the paperwork sent to a postal box.

In 1997, when she bought a Roman coin necklace for $15,000 and a $16,600 Rolex watch studded with diamonds, she listed as her mailing address one that is currently used by a UPS Store in Miami. At the time, the shipping facility operated under the name Mail Boxes Etc.

After Columba Bush was forced to pay $4,100 in fines and duties for the purchases she had tried to slip past customs agents at Atlanta’s Hartsfield International Airport, the governor said her shopping habits were no one else’s business.

“It is a lot of money. But look, that’s between her and me,” he said. The episode happened at a particularly sensitive moment, because Jeb Bush’s brother George, the governor of Texas, was making the first of his two successful bids for the White House.

Romney Signals He May Try Again in 2016

Perhaps because Jeb Bush so far has less than commanding support and because the rest of the GOP 2016 candidate field consists of such a clown car of lunatics and egomaniacs out of touch with reality, Mitt "Let Them Eat Cake" Romney is indicating that he may consider another presidential run in 2016.  Or perhaps his ego is still smarting from the 2012 loss.  Whatever the reason, one has to wonder how Romney can escape all of the baggage that sank his campaign in 2012, but then again, hope springs eternal I guess.  It will certainly add to the fun to be able to take shots at Romney and his Marie Antoinette want to be wife.   Politico looks at the possible face off between Romney and Jeb Bush.  Here are excerpts:

Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush have long been cordial toward each other, even if they aren’t exactly besties. Both are former governors, aligned with the business-friendly establishment side of the Republican Party.

Now, with Romney’s announcement this week that he is exploring a third run for the White House, the two men are on a potential collision course. It’s a fight neither may be eager to have, but which some donors are framing as a referendum on the past versus the future, even if both men have been well-known political figures for years.

Romney has told many people privately that he believes Bush, the brother of the last Republican president, will have trouble winning the presidency. Bush, who announced last month that he was considering presidential run, has made it clear publicly that he believes Romney ran a poor campaign when he was the GOP’s nominee in 2012.

As they each look toward 2016, and if both do end up running, they will find themselves competing for pledges from the same donors, not to mention the same pool of aides and operatives, and the same types of voters in the Republican primary.

Although the emerging GOP 2016 field appears to be large and unwieldy, the establishment lane would shift dramatically if both Bush and Romney are standing in it. Many Republicans predict potential candidates such as New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Ohio Gov. John Kasich would find themselves struggling.

In what struck many Republicans as a clear reaction to Bush, Romney laid down his own marker Friday during a meeting in New York with about 30 of his past supporters. As his longtime finance director Spencer Zwick stood by, the former Massachusetts governor surprised many of those gathered — some of whom have already said they are backing Bush — by saying he was considering a run.

Romney’s remarks Friday put in neon lights what he’d more quietly told New York financiers in December: He would not defer to Bush and did not view the former Florida governor as the de facto leader of the establishment wing of the GOP.

Romney has long dreamed of the White House, and he’s been tormented by his loss to Obama in 2012. He said his decision wouldn’t be based on what anyone else did, and he insisted he has a broad vision for the country, according to attendees. Yet, his move struck a number of his own past supporters as a last gasp as the 2016 train appeared to be moving on without him.

One Republican donor said Romney’s actions could even benefit Bush by making the former Florida governor, who has been around electoral politics for three decades, look “large, fresh, new.”

“He’s trying too hard,” said one Republican strategist who has worked with Romney. “He needed to let Jeb sink or swim, then there would have been an opening, or not.”

Romney allies say he’ll likely take the next two months or so to decide what to do, much faster than the mid-2015 time-frame many Republicans familiar with his thinking had anticipated.

One Republican was brutal in assessing things: “This is Mitt’s version of scrambling … I think Mitt’s just keeping his options open and the next 90 days will tell just how many of those options actually exist.”

But Romney’s maneuver also made it clear that Jeb Bush is not Hillary Clinton, the Democrat who has essentially cleared her side of the field so far of any major challengers without even declaring she’s running. And Romney’s admirers don’t believe it’s strictly vanity that’s driving him.

Including Romney, more than 15 Republicans are either openly considering a White House run or are being floated as potential contenders, including several — such as Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, and former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania — who would battle for the social conservative vote.

It should make for great spectator sport and God knows what batshitery will slip out!

Bob McDonnell and Wife Due in Federal Court Today

One of the reasons that the Virginia Republicans are making so much noise about Mark Herring's decision to not defend Virginia's gay marriage ban is because they want to take attention away from headlines like this: "Former Va. Governor, Wife Due in Federal Court."  It is headlines like this that show how rotten things are under the supposedly "family values" crowd that preaches one thing while doing something very different in practice.  And let's not forget that the evangelical Christians hyperventilating over Herring's action as a group  have the highest divorce rate in America.  So much for the sanctity of marriage.  NBC 4 in Washington looks at today's court appearance by Bob and Maureen McDonnell.  Here are excerpts:

Former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, are set to make their first court appearance on federal corruption charges. 

A bond hearing is scheduled for 10 a.m., followed by an arraignment at 11 a.m. Friday in U.S. District Court in Richmond.

The former Republican governor and his wife were indicted Tuesday after a lengthy federal investigation of his relationship with a former CEO of a dietary supplement maker.

The 14-count indictment accuses the McDonnells of accepting gifts totaling more than $135,000 including loans, a Rolex watch, rounds of golf at an exclusive club and designer clothes, among other gifts. It connects those gifts to support that Maureen and Bob McDonnell gave to Star Scientific, a Glen Allen, Va.-based company that makes dietary supplements.

McDonnell and his wife are charged with one count of conspiracy to commit honest-services wire fraud; three counts of honest-services wire fraud; one count of conspiracy to obtain property under color of official right; six counts of obtaining property under color of official right; and one count of making false statements to a federal credit union.

McDonnell is also charged with an additional count of making a false statement to a financial institution, and Maureen McDonnell is charged with one count of obstruction of an official proceeding.

Yep, those are the type of "conservative" and "family values" that the Virginia GOP doesn't want people to notice.  Hence the increased hysteria over gay marriage.  Any thing to change the topic.

Virginia's Sullied Image - Racist, Homophobic, and Now Corrupt

Virginia already has image problems with many parts of America and the rest of the world.  The state has a reputation as being among the most anti-gay in the country.  And then there's the increasingly obvious racism of the Republican Party of Virginia that new voter ID laws have helped to underscore.  And Loving v. Virginia will forever be an indictment of the state's racist past. But up until now, rightly or wrongly, Virginia retained an image of not being outright corrupt.  With the indictment of former Governor Bob McDonnell and his Marie Antoinette like wife, now Virginia joins the ranks of politically corrupt states.  A column in the Richmond Times Dispatch looks at this:

The federal indictment Tuesday of former Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, seems more an exercise in voyeurism than law enforcement. It’s that unseemly. It’s also historic, shattering Virginia’s reputation for honest, well-mannered government. A governor in irons is an image associated with Maryland, Tennessee, Louisiana, Connecticut and Illinois.

A disputed dietary supplement, Anatabloc is the brainchild of Jonnie R. Williams Sr., flamboyant former chief of financially troubled Star Scientific Inc. Williams saw gold in Anatabloc. To realize any riches required legitimizing his product, affixing to it the imprimatur of respected scientists and public officials. And that meant Williams needed friends in high places. So did Bob and Maureen McDonnell, but for different reasons.

The 43-page indictment depicts the McDonnells as practically destitute — tapped out by the expense of educating five children; of later marrying off two daughters; by investing in pricey resort real estate that would become a black hole; of keeping up appearances. Their difficulties were in full flower even before Bob McDonnell was sworn in as governor in January 2010.

It might have been avoided, the indictment suggests, had she listened to the people on whom the governor relied to protect his image as the earnest public official.  

Until the McDonnell indictments, federal criminal entanglements were a rarity for Virginia elective officials. 

[A]n elaborate scheme unfolded — one in which the government of Virginia, following enthusiastic assurances by Maureen McDonnell to Williams, pledged to support his money-losing company. 

While others have not mentioned it, McDonnell joins a list of discredited Regent Law School graduates.  Apparently, Pat Robertson is good at indoctrinating religious extremism, but not so good at stressing common ethics and ethical behavior.

Media Feeding Frenzy Ensues Over McDonald Indictments

Maureen McDonnell with Johnnie Williams

As noted yesterday, I continue to wonder what happened to the Bob McDonald I once knew.  In the wake of yesterday's indictment of McDonnell and his wife Maureen, the media both in Virginia and nationally has gone into a feeding frenzy and initial reports seem to confirm my gut feeling that it was Maureen McDonnell that started this train wreck in motion as she seemingly wanted to live the life of a modern day Marie Antoinette using other people's money.  Why Bob McDonnell did not nip the situation in the bud is something we may never know.  The Richmond Times Dispatch reports on Maureen McDonnell's e-mail trail that indeed suggests that she started the fiasco.  Here are story highlights:

The McDonnells were broke and up to their ears in credit card debt. And Star Scientific CEO Jonnie Williams Sr. came to the rescue.

Trips to basketball games and plane tickets to a bachelorette party. Designer clothes for the first lady, golf for the kids, a Rolex to wear and a Ferrari for the governor to borrow and drive. Cash to cover mortgage debt and to purchase Star stock.

According to the 43-page federal indictment, Maureen and Bob McDonnell showed their appreciation by providing Williams access to the governor and his influence. And when federal investigators began to scrutinize the relationship, the first couple allegedly tried to cover it up.

The indictment sheds new light on numerous aspects of their relationship with Williams, and on the federal investigation.

JW refers to Williams. CM is Cailin, one of the McDonnells’ daughters. MoBo is a real estate partnership for vacation properties the family owned. JE is referred to as counsel and senior policy adviser to McDonnell.

Here are verbatim excerpts from the indictment:

“In or about December 2009, Robert McDonnell attended a political event at the Four Seasons Hotel in New York City. As a result of a request by JW to one of Robert McDonnell’s staff, JW met with Robert McDonnell and Maureen McDonnell at the Four Seasons Hotel. During the meeting, Maureen McDonnell asked for assistance in finding a designer dress for her husband’s upcoming inauguration as governor, and JW agreed to help.

Maureen McDonnell subsequently informed JE, one of Robert McDonnell’s senior staff members, that JW had agreed to purchase a designer dress by Oscar de la Renta for Maureen McDonnell for the inauguration. JE expressed concerns regarding the prospect of JW purchasing Maureen McDonnell’s inaugural dress and ultimately informed her that JW’s purchase of a designer dress for the inauguration would be inappropriate and should not be done. As a result, Maureen McDonnell became upset with JE.

On or about December 21, 2009, Maureen McDonnell sent an email to JE, stating:

‘I need to talk to you about Inaugural clothing budget. I need answers and Bob is screaming about the thousands I’m charging up in credit card debt. We are broke, have an unconscionable amount in credit card debt already, and this Inaugural is killing us!! I need answers and I need help, and I need to get this done.’

“On or about April 13, 2011, JW accompanied Maureen McDonnell to several luxury stores in New York City, including Oscar de la Renta, Louis Vuitton, and Bergdorf Goodman. Maureen McDonnell informed JW that she needed dresses and accessories for her daughter’s upcoming wedding and for her and Robert McDonnell’s upcoming anniversary party. JW paid for the entire luxury shopping trip for Maureen McDonnell and spent approximately $10,999 at Oscar de la Renta, approximately $5,685 at Louis Vuitton, and approximately $2,604 at Bergdorf Goodman.

As promised by Maureen McDonnell, JW was seated next to Robert McDonnell at the Union League Club event later that evening.”

Maureen McDonnell asked JW for a $50,000 loan. Maureen McDonnell also told JW that she could help Star Scientific but that she needed JW’s financial assistance.”

“Maureen McDonnell also informed JW that she and Robert McDonnell did not know how they were going to pay for their daughter’s upcoming wedding expenses, and she asked for JW’s assistance. JW asked how much money was needed, and Maureen McDonnell responded that $15,000 was needed to pay the remaining catering costs.”

There's much more in the article, but what strikes me is that Maureen McDonnell never seems to have considered the option of her family living less extravagantly.   I paid for a daughter's wedding and it DOES NOT have to cost $15,000 for "the remaining catering costs."  We hear the members of the GOP constantly telling Americans that they need to live within their means.  That obviously wasn't the rule at the Governor's mansion over the last four years. 

Will Bob McDonnell Be Indicted?

As the Richmond Times Dispatch reports, speculation continues on whether or not Bob McDonnell and/or Maureen "Marie Antoinette" McDonnell in connection with the more than $266,000 in gifts, cash payments and political contributions received from Jonnie R. Williams and Star Scientific.  As noted to date, part of Taliban Bob's defense is that he did not know who much loot his greed driven wife received from Williams.   Meanwhile, there seems to be no explanation from Ms. McDonnell on why she acted like Emelda Marcos in her pursuit of designer clothes on lavish shopping trips to New York City.  Personally, I find it beyond belief that something of wasn't done for Williams/Star Scientific in return for such lavish spending.   As for McDonnell's feigned lack of knowledge, it's what I have called the Sergeant Schultz defense.  I don't buy it.  Here are highlights from the Times Dispatch:

Attorneys and law professors are uncertain whether Gov. Bob McDonnell’s legal troubles could lead to a federal indictment.

But if McDonnell is indicted and declines to step down, Republican legislative leaders privately are steeling themselves to ask the governor to resign to spare the state from distraction as the government gears up to produce a two-year budget by December.

Andrew G. McBride, who spent seven years as an assistant U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, and three in the main Department of Justice, said the case doesn’t fit exactly a classic public corruption model — an official act in exchange for some form of compensation.

“At the same time, it has some egregious facts that might well lead the U.S. Attorney’s Office to indict.

“Or, I could very much see a situation, and this is authorized by the U.S. attorney’s manual, where they trade non-indictment of both the governor and the first lady in exchange for the immediate resignation of the governor.”

The coming weeks could be decisive. A decision or announcement could be made within two weeks to avoid getting too close to the November election.

Williams, the Star CEO, is facing his own potential legal troubles. Leading the defense team for Williams are Richard Cullen, chairman of McGuireWoods and a former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia; and Toby Vick, a former federal prosecutor.

Lawyers say he could have trouble with the income tax laws for cash gifts made to the McDonnells.

Federal investigators are probing whether McDonnell or his administration provided any benefit to Williams and his company in exchange for the more than $166,000 in gifts, loans and cash payments Williams provided to the first family — in addition to nearly $110,000 in campaign and political action committee donations. The governor has maintained that Star Scientific has not received any special treatment from his administration.

There's more to the piece for those interested.  Again, no one gives that much money without expecting something.

Ann "Marie Antoinette" Romney: Throw Out Public Education

Proving herself again to be an out of touch bitch Ann "Marie Antoinette" Romney proposes that the solution to America's education system is to discard it and go with charter schools.  I'm surprised she didn't outright say school vouchers are the solution since a pet project of the Christianists is to send their children to church affiliated, science denying schools - the Christianist equivalent of a madrassa, if you will - and have the government pick up the cost.  As for everyone else's children, being the "godly Christians" that they are, they'd happily kick those children to the curb.   The irony, of course, as noted in Daily Kos is that neither Ann Romney, her husband, or any of her children has ever attended public school:

Among her talking points, this:

I've been a First Lady of the State. I have seen what happens to people's lives if they don't get a proper education. And we know the answers to that. The charter schools have provided the answers. The teachers' unions are preventing those things from happening, from bringing real change to our educational system. We need to throw out the system.

 Mrs. Romney, of course, is not an educator and has no experience as a teacher. Other than as a candidate's wife (if then), she's probably never even set a well-shod dainty foot inside a public school. She went to private school; so did her husband and children. And the "answers" the charter schools are providing? As mysterious as her tax returns. I guess we'll just have to take her word for it.

Equally disturbing is her mindset that serving as a Mormon missionary is equivalent with serving in the nation's armed forces.  Unlike one of my sons-in-law, the Romney sons are too good to risk their lives for their country - they are "too important" just like their draft dodging father:

As Mrs. Romney said on The View last week, Mormon missions are the equivalent of military service:

My five sons have also served their mission. None served in the military. None served in the military, but I do have one son that feels that he’s giving back to his country in a significant way where he is now a doctor, and he is taking care of veterans. So we find different ways of serving, and my five boys and my husband did serve missions, and did not serve in the military.   "I sent them away boys, and they came back men," she added.

So many real "gold star" Moms would have been so very grateful to have had their sons "come back men" -- or to have had them come back at all.

Can someone please tell this woman to get her head out of her self-centered, self-absorbed ass?   The woman is despicable.

 

Mitt Romney Showed His Arrogance Last Night

It's no secret that I do not like Mitt Romney.  Frankly, in my view he's an arrogant prick: the spoiled little rich boy who thinks living an apartment while living off of trust funds while attending graduate school was a struggle.  And his equally bitchy and arrogant wife, Ann "Marie Antoinette" Romney is no better in my book.   Fortunately, some of Romney's arrogance and sense of extreme entitlement came through last night - along with his patent dishonesty mentioned in a prior post.  Also telling was Romney's failure to give any specifics on how he would grow and strengthen the U.S. economy.  He merely said that he would and that was supposed to be all the voters - who he views as peasants and would be serfs to GOP plutocrats - need to know.  Thus, the real issue becomes whether or not voters wake up to who the real Mitt Romney is over the next couple of weeks or not.  Are Americans as stupid as Romney believes them to be.  I for one hope not.  A column in the Washington Post looks at these issues further.  Here some highlights:

[T]he most electorally significant performance was Romney’s. Under pressure this time, the former Massachusetts governor displayed his least attractive sides. He engaged in pointless on-stage litigation of the debate rules. He repeatedly demonstrated his disrespect for both the president and Candy Crowley, the moderator. And Romney was just plain querulous when anyone dared question him about the gaping holes in his tax and budget plans.

Any high school debate coach would tell a student that declaring, “Believe me because I said so,” is not an argument. Yet Romney confused biography with specificity and boasting with answering a straightforward inquiry. “Well, of course, they add up,” Romney insisted of his budget numbers.

Romney’s stonewalling was so obvious that it opened the way for one of Obama’s most effective lines of the evening: “If somebody came to you, Governor, with a plan that said, here, I want to spend $7 or $8 trillion, and then we’re going to pay for it, but we can’t tell you until maybe after the election how we’re going to do it, you wouldn’t have taken such a sketchy deal. And neither should you, the American people, because the math doesn’t add up.”

The most instructive contrast between Debate I and Debate II was the extent to which Romney’s ideas crumbled at the slightest contact with challenge. Romney and Paul Ryan are erecting a Potemkin village designed to survive only until the polls close on Nov. 6. They cannot say directly that they really believe in slashing taxes on the rich and backing away from so much of what government does because they know that neither idea will sell. So they offer soothing language to the middle class, photo ops at homeless programs to convey compassion and a steady stream of attacks on Obama, aimed at shifting all the attention his way.

In the first debate, Obama let Romney back into the race by failing to shake his opponent’s self-presentation. But Romney also put himself into contention by pretending to be a moderate, shelving his plutocratic side and hiding his party’s long-term objectives.

In the second debate, the disguise fell. Romney revealed more of himself than he wanted to and asked voters to endorse a radical tax-cutting program without providing them the details that matter. Sketchy is one word for this. Deceptive is another.

Why Romney's Lying About the Availability of Health Care

I often disagree with much of what Nicholas Kristof writes, but in today's New York Times he hits a home run as he looks at the continuing tragedy of those who find themselves without health care insurance either through no fault of their own or through carelessness and/or a false sense of immortality.  Mitt Romney has pledged to undo the Affordale Health Care Act ("AHA") - derisively called "Obamacare" by the far right and Republicans - which among other things seeks to increase the number of Americans.  In Romney's mind, just as 47% of Americans are moochers and parasites, so too are millions of Americans disposable.  Simply unworthy or unimportant trash to be discarded.  Kristof begins his column by looking at the unfortunate situation of a friend and then looks at what Romney and the GOP would do to millions of citizens.  Here are column excerpts:

Yet for all his innate prudence, Scott now, at age 52, is suffering from Stage 4 prostate cancer, in part because he didn’t have health insurance. President Obama’s health care reform came just a bit too late to help Scott, but it will protect others like him — unless Mitt Romney repeals it. 

If you favor gutting “Obamacare,” please listen to Scott’s story. He is willing to recount his embarrassing tale in part so that readers can learn from it.   I’ll let Scott take over the narrative:

•

It all started in December 2003 when I quit my job as a pension consultant in a fit of midlife crisis. For the next year I did little besides read books I’d always wanted to read and play poker in the local card rooms.

I didn’t buy health insurance because I knew it would be really expensive in the individual policy market, because many of the people in this market are high risk. I would have bought insurance if there had been any kind of fair-risk pooling. In 2005 I started working seasonally for H&R Block doing tax returns.

As seasonal work it of course doesn’t provide health benefits, but then lots of full-time jobs don’t either. I knew I was taking a big risk without insurance, but I was foolish.

In 2011 I began having greater difficulty peeing. I didn’t go see the doctor because that would have been several hundred dollars out of pocket — just enough disincentive to get me to make a bad decision.

A normal P.S.A. test for prostate cancer is below 4, and mine was 1,100. They also did a CT scan, which turned up possible signs of cancerous bone lesions. Prostate cancer likes to spread to bones.

Let’s just stipulate up front that Scott blew it. Other people are sometimes too poor to buy health insurance or unschooled about the risks. Scott had no excuse. He could have afforded insurance 

He’s the first to admit that he screwed up catastrophically and may die as a result. .  .  .  .  Yet remember also that while Scott was foolish, mostly he was unlucky. He is a bachelor, so he didn’t have a spouse whose insurance he could fall back on in his midlife crisis. In any case, we all take risks, and usually we get away with them. Scott is a usually prudent guy who took a chance, and then everything went wrong. 

The Mitt Romney philosophy, as I understand it, is that this is a tragic but necessary byproduct of requiring Americans to take personal responsibility for their lives. They need to understand that mistakes have consequences. That’s why Romney would repeal Obamacare and leave people like Scott to pay the price for their irresponsibility. 

To me, that seems ineffably harsh. We all make mistakes, and a humane government tries to compensate for our misjudgments. That’s why highways have guardrails, why drivers must wear seat belts, why police officers pull over speeders, why we have fire codes. In other modern countries, Scott would have been insured, and his cancer would have been much more likely to be detected in time for effective treatment. Is that a nanny state? No, it’s a civilized one. 

President Obama’s care plan addresses this problem inelegantly, by forcing people like Scott to buy insurance beginning in 2014. Some will grumble about the “mandate” and the insurance cost, but it will save lives. 

Already, Obamacare is slowly reducing the number of people without health insurance, as young adults can now stay on their parents’ plans. But the Census Bureau reported last month that 48.6 million Americans are still uninsured — a travesty in a wealthy country. The Urban Institute calculated in 2008 that some 27,000 Americans between the ages of 25 and 65 die prematurely each year because they don’t have health insurance. Another estimate is even higher. 

You want to put a face on those numbers? Look at Scott’s picture. One American like him dies every 20 minutes for lack of health insurance.

Romney's statement that no one goes without health care is a lie.  And it costs lives literally daily.  It is a scandal that the USA does not provide health care coverage like every other modern industrialized nation.  It's an even bigger scandal that those seeking to repeal AHA  are the same ones who claim to be godly Christians even as they utterly ignore the Gospel message of Christ.  The hypocrisy of it all in mind numbing.

Out of Touch Romney Calls $200,000 - $250,000 "Middle Income"

This blog has noted time and time again Mitt Romney's utter inability to grasp much less feel the slightest  empathy for the lives of most Americans  He and his wife truly are today's version of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette of the American political world.  And now Romney has underscored this reality yet again when he said during a :Good Morning America" interview that "middle income" as income of $200,000 to $250,000.  Perhaps in Mr. Romney's world of great wealth and privilege, but in low wage Hampton Roads that income bracket would put one among the wealthy. Back in the real world the U.S. Census Bureau reports that median income is $50,000 - that's right, a mere one-quarter of what Romney sees as "middle income."   The Washington Post looks a Romney's latest "sliver foot in his mouth" moment.  Here are excerpts:

Mitt Romney is promising to reduce taxes on middle-income Americans.  But how does he define “middle-income”? The Republican presidential nominee defined it Friday as income of $200,000 to $250,000 a year and less.

Romney’s comments came an interview broadcast Friday on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

“No one can say my plan is going to raise taxes on middle-income people, because principle number one is (to) keep the burden down on middle-income taxpayers,” Romney told host George Stephanopoulos.

“Is $100,000 middle income?” Stephanopoulos asked.  “No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less,” Romney responded.


The Census Bureau reported this week that the median household income — the midpoint for the nation — is just over $50,000.

Obama wants to extend Bush-era tax cuts for those making less than $250,000, while Romney wants to extend the tax cuts for everyone.

Romney has not explained how he would keep his plan from growing the nation’s deficit.

Ann "Marie Antoinette" Romney on "Meet the Press"

If you don't know what you are talking about - or in the case of Ann Romney are clueless about the struggles and reality of others - sometimes it is better to simply shut up and be quiet.  Ms. Romney apparently has not gotten that message as she tried on Meet the Press to humanize her plastic robotic husband and herself yet she ended up underscoring just how out of touch they are in fact.  David Badash has a piece in The New Civil Rights Movement that looks at Ms. Romney's ill advised performance.  The woman truly has no clue how most Americans live pay check to pay check and may lie awake at night worry about how they will care for their families and make sure that they have health care, a roof over their heads, and basic necessities.  Here are highlights:

Ann Romney, in a Meet The Press interview – rare for a candidate and their spouse to appear together — took that opportunity and severely damaged her husband’s campaign. Ann Romney suffers from Marie Antoinette syndrome, apparently, and the Romney campaign is ludicrously unaware that when the 63-year old dressage equestrian speaks to the press, she often reveals just how much of a moneyed, out-of-touch one percenter she, and Mitt, truly are.

Ann says Mitt “has been demonized in many ways as being heartless,” and uses the example of him visiting a dying leukemia patient.

Ann neglects to connect the dots that Mitt may have visited a dying leukemia patient, but President Obama has worked to ensure that dying leukemia patients, people with pre-existing conditions, and practically all Americans can get the healthcare they need by making it more accessible and affordable, eliminating lifetime caps and pre-existing condition denials.

Mrs. Romney also told David Gregory on Meet The Press:

Well, I think the thing that I want to communicate to people, and that it’s so important that people understand, is that Mitt and I do recognize that we have not had a financial struggle in our lives. But I want people to believe in their hearts that we know what it is like to struggle. And our struggles have not been financial, but they’ve been with health and with difficulties in different things in life.

While Ann Romney has had to struggle with breast cancer and MS — two devastating diseases that are no one should have to face in the 21st century — she had the benefit of access to the best healthcare, drugs and treatments — traditional and alternative — and doctors money can buy, something her husband would deny Americans who can’t afford it. Indeed, Ann Romney’s MS treatment regime is just plain inaccessible to the vast majority of those who might need it. While diseases place unimaginable stresses and struggles on anyone who is fighting them, and their family, Ann Romney never had to worry about how to pay for her treatments.

When Americans are literally cutting their prescriptions in half to make them last longer, Ann Romney has never used a pill cutter to save money, or worry about what to buy: medication or food, as far too many Americans do every day. The very Americans who her husband would like to deprive of access to those medications, and government programs that literally help keep them alive.

In short, Ann Romney and her husband Mitt no doubt have faced some of the same struggles as many Americans. Illness, a prime example. But their financial ability to shield themselves from the ravages of those diseases has apparently inoculated them from understanding how not being able to afford life saving treatment, drugs, and care impact the rest of America. If it hadn’t, they would be championing Obamacare, food stamps, and TANF.

Yes, I have been brutal on Ann Romney.  I make no apologies.  What her husband and Paul Ryan seek to do to countless Americans is even more brutal and certainly underscores the hypocrisy of both Romneys and Paul Ryan who pretend to embrace the Gospel message even as they make the Biblical Pharisees look like pretty in touch folks.

Group Claims to Have Stolen Copies of Romney Tax Returns

Only time will tell whether or not the claim is for real or merely a stunt to keep a lively discussion of Mitt Romney's hidden tax returns in the political mix, but a group is claiming that it has stolen copies of Romney's pre-2010 tax returns from an office of Price Waterhouse Coopers.  Obviously, if the claim is real and the returns are released, the world will know the details of whatever Romney has been secretly hiding.  Since I have a growing dislike for Romney, who seems to be an arrogant pathological liar driven only by his quest for more and more wealth, part of me would like the claim to be true and to see the returns released.  Here are highlights from coverage in the Washington Post:

FRANKLIN, Tenn. — The Secret Service said Wednesday it is investigating the reported theft of copies of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s federal tax records during a break-in at an accounting office in Franklin. Someone claiming responsibility demanded $1 million not to make them public.

An anonymous letter sent to Romney’s accounting firm and political offices in Tennessee and published online sought $1 million in hard-to-trace Internet currency to prevent the disclosure of his tax filings, which have emerged as a key focus during the 2012 presidential race. Romney released his 2010 tax returns and a 2011 estimate in January, but he has refused to disclose his returns from earlier years.

Romney’s accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers, said there was no evidence that any Romney tax files were stolen.  “At this time there is no evidence that our systems have been compromised or that there was any unauthorized access to the data in question,” PricewaterhouseCoopers spokesman Chris Atkins said.

The data theft was claimed in letters left with political party offices in Franklin and disclosed in several Tennessee-area newspapers. Jean Barwick, the executive director of the Williamson County Republic Party, said employees in the GOP office found a small package on Friday with a hand-written address. The package contained a letter and a computer flash drive, she said.

An anonymous posting on a file-sharing website said the returns were stolen Aug. 25 from the accounting firm’s office. After “all available 1040 tax forms for Romney were copied,” the posting said, flash drives containing encrypted copies of his pre-2010 tax records were sent to the firm and to Republican and Democratic party offices.

Barwick said she turned over the materials to the Secret Service. She said she was not able to confirm that copies of any tax returns were stored on the flash drive.

As I said, it will be interesting to see if the claim turns out to be a hoax or not.  I'm sure that Mitt and Ann "Marie Antoinette" Romney are peeved.  As you recall, Ann/Marie said "you people" have been given all that we are going to give.

Romney: What Does He Really Believe?

As a Politico article discusses, the GOP continues to fret over Mitt Romney's "image."   The key problem according to Politico:

Romney’s inability so far to counter President Barack Obama’s efforts to portray him as an out-of-touch elitist who got rich through predatory business practices is perhaps his biggest general election hurdle, many top Republicans here said Monday.

Perhaps the core of the problem is that Romney IS what the Obama campaign has sought to depict him to be.  It does seem that money is the only thing that gets Romney passionate.  That and avoiding taxes in any and every way possible.  And Ann "Marie Antoinette" Romney isn't much better.  A thoughtful article by The Economist tries to decipher what Romney really believes in and that august business magazine  found it was an impossible task:

WHEN Mitt Romney was governor of liberal Massachusetts, he supported abortion, gun control, tackling climate change and a requirement that everyone should buy health insurance, backed up with generous subsidies for those who could not afford it. Now, as he prepares to fly to Tampa to accept the Republican Party’s nomination for president on August 30th, he opposes all those things.

All politicians flip-flop from time to time; but Mr Romney could win an Olympic medal in it (see article).

But competence is worthless without direction and, frankly, character. Would that Candidate Romney had indeed presented himself as a solid chief executive who got things done. Instead he has appeared as a fawning PR man, apparently willing to do or say just about anything to get elected. In some areas, notably social policy and foreign affairs, the result is that he is now committed to needlessly extreme or dangerous courses that he may not actually believe in but will find hard to drop . . . 

There are some areas where Mr Romney has shuffled to the right unnecessarily. In America’s culture wars he has followed the Republican trend of adopting ever more socially conservative positions.

The damage done to a Romney presidency by his courting of the isolationist right in the primaries could prove more substantial. He has threatened to label China as a currency manipulator on the first day of his presidency. Even if it is unclear what would follow from that, risking a trade war with one of America’s largest trading partners when the recovery is so sickly seems especially mindless. Some of his anti-immigration policies won’t help, either. And his attempts to lure American Jews with near-racist talk about Arabs and belligerence against Iran could ill serve the interests of his country (and, for that matter, Israel’s).

In theory, Mr Romney has a detailed 59-point economic plan. In practice, it ignores virtually all the difficult or interesting questions (indeed, “The Romney Programme for Economic Recovery, Growth and Jobs” is like “Fifty Shades of Grey” without the sex).

Which bits of Mr Ryan’s scheme does he agree with? It is a little odd that the number two has a plan and his boss doesn’t. And it is all very well promising to repeal Barack Obama’s health-care plan and the equally gargantuan Dodd-Frank act on financial regulation, but what exactly will Mr Romney replace them with—unless, of course, he thinks Wall Street was well-regulated before Lehman went bust?

Mr Romney may calculate that it is best to keep quiet: the faltering economy will drive voters towards him. It is more likely, however, that his evasiveness will erode his main competitive advantage. A businessman without a credible plan to fix a problem stops being a credible businessman. So does a businessman who tells you one thing at breakfast and the opposite at supper. Indeed, all this underlines the main doubt: nobody knows who this strange man really is.

[H]e has a lot of questions to answer in Tampa.

He does indeed, and I'm not expecting to see any honest or revealing answers.  Whatever comes down, will be more cynically calculated PR propaganda.

On Our Radar – The Romney Millions And The Damage They Have Done

Mitt and Ann Romney are almost boastful about the money they have given to the Mormon Church - the same Church that owns commercial properties and other investments that seem to be focused on things other than feeding the hungry, clothing the naked and giving shelter to to the homeless.  As a former Catholic, I don't mean to single out the Mormon Church for abuse.  The sad reality is that most of institutional religion - be it Catholic Mormon or something else - over the centuries has utterly forgotten the Gospel message and instead has focused almost exclusively on amassing wealth,  power and control over the lives of others.  Oh, and there's that little thing called Proposition 8 - legalized bigotry and the infusion of religious belief into the civil laws that Mitt Romney's Mormon Church spearheaded.  Thus, in my book, boasting about the money one has given to a bigoted institution which seeks to subvert the separation of church and state written into the United States Constitution isn't a positive.  In fact, it's a huge negative.  If Mitt ans Ann Romney were truly concerned about charitable works, they would have made directly to orphanages, medical facilities, soup kitchens, etc. Jean Ann Esselink has a piece in The New Civil Rights Movement looks at what the Romneys' "charitable giving" has actually helped finance.  Here are excerpts:

Mitt can call me “small-minded,” and tax-obsessed if he must, but I feel compelled to object to his wife’s characterization of their so-called generosity. Tithing to the Mormon Church is not a laudable deed for which Mitt and Ann Romney should be praised or admired. In fact, I think it should disqualify Governor Romney from holding national office.

This week Queen Ann shook her finger in our faces while she scolded us like naughty children for asking to see the royal taxes. If you saw her performance, there is a high probability it aroused in you a desire to chomp down on that wagging digit like you were channeling the baby in Lemony Snicket’s. Ann let us know, by royal decree, that they will not be releasing any more tax forms so their enemies can use the information in it against them. Fair enough. But in the very next sentence she insisted we not only take her word they paid their fair share of taxes, but that we also credit them with giving ten percent of their income to the Mormon Church. I am more than happy to ascribe that contribution to them, but “credit” is not a word I would attach to such a gift. I’d go with “blame.”

 For years, Mitt and Ann Romney have contributed ten percent of their mega-earnings to the Mormon Church. The Church then used their contributions to defend DOMA and offer gay reparative therapy, and fund Prop 8. They may want to call it “charity” but Mitt and Ann hurt people; specifically, they hurt gay people. It is important that they not be allowed to hide behind some altruistic notion of the phrase “tithed to my church” like the donation itself is a good thing, regardless of what pain their money caused.

[W]hen you give to a Church or a charity, you decide what you want your money to be used for. Mitt and Ann did not choose to save the houses of foreclosed homeowners or  provide state-of-the-art prosthetic limbs for wounded vets. Mitt and Ann gave willingly to an organization that has dedicated itself to keeping couples of the same sex from marrying, and denying children, like little Nolan and Ryanne and Jacob (image,right,) who will have their right to a two parent family decided by a judge this week, all the protections and benefits marriage bestows.

The Romneys claiming they support the Mormon Church but not its campaign of discrimination, would be like a donor saying he contributed to the KKK’s choir robe fund, but the Klan promised him none of his money would go to buy rope.

I have yet to hear anyone in the news media ask the Romneys if they are bothered by how the Mormons used their money. If someone should dare, I hope they will not accept a generic “I’m for DOMA, one man, one woman.” as a response. Ask what threat a loving couple getting married in California was to their lives in Massachusetts. Pin them down as to why they gave the Mormon Church such staggering sums, knowing they would use it to hurt people who never hurt them.

[P]lease ask Governor Romney how he can possibly be president of ALL Americans when he actively funds the effort to discriminate against millions of them.