By Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
No word yet if the Moon is in the seventh house or if Jupiter has aligned with Mars but something curious is happening among the monied gentry that form the Republican base. Seems Presidential candidate Mitt Romney is being called out and dissed by the “family.” First, NJ governor Chris Christie, once thought of as a possible Romney running mate for VP, praises Obama for his FEMA support after Hurricane Sandy (and juxtaposed with Romney’s call to end FEMA), and now Chrysler exec. Ralph Gilles calls Romney a liar and full of something rhyming with Mitt.
What prompted Giles’ ire was a tweeted claim by the candidate that, “Obama is a terrible negotiator. He bails out Chrysler and now Chrysler wants to send all Jeep manufacturing to China–and will!” The responding electronic salvo from Gilles was blunt and scatological, “”You are full of sh*t!” Gilles later apologized for his language, but his sentiment was backed up by Chrysler Group LLC Chief Executive Sergio Marchionne who emailed employees that, “I feel obliged to unambiguously restate our position: Jeep production will not be moved from the United States to China.”
Romney had claimed at a speech in swing state Ohio that he read a news article flatly stating that all Jeep production was moving. Jeep has a huge assembly facility in Toledo, so the claim hit like an Arctic blast to a state with 7% unemployment (down from 10.5 % in 2010). Marchionne, who heads both Chrysler and Fiat, seemed to blame Romney’s possible dyslexia saying Jeep production in China would be for the Chinese market, and that the company would not take any production away from Chrysler’s U.S. plants. Rather, he said, Chrysler is adding jobs and investment at its Ohio plant.
No word yet on what Romney read. Maybe the polls in Ohio showing him trailing by 3-4 percentage points.
What makes the two circumstances interesting is the public nature of the family dispute. It’s rare that any Republican strays from Ronald Reagan’s cult like (and faintly un-American) “11th Commandment’ that, “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.”
Even more rare is upsetting the guy you think might be the next President — unless, that is, you don’t ….
Source: Huffington Post
~Mark Esposito, Guest Blogger
Idealist707, perhaps you would clarify the term Labcdef I don’t believe I have ever seen it before.
Great video clip Elaine! The answer is he believes in anything you are willing to pay him to believe in.
OMG, fundy bend. Fundamental bend. Yes, yes. Oh how unexpected in the South. ????? Let us hope that their fundamentalism has not undermined their mission of charity. It was quite intact in LA when I needed it. But times change.
I just felt like beating the
drum in tact with you guys for once.
Now I am confused as usual, and explaining is a bore for you. The Labcdef as some call them objected to them for the very reason…….ie objected to the Salvation Army because they are anti Labcdef. Right?
Well, I supported them for the unclearly made point
that their Christian ideals (?) made them more concerned for victims than for the small salaries they get. And we have agreed that if I don’t ask about their Labcdef stand, then they won’t ssk what children’s fund I have stolen the money from
I wonder if it was to the SA that you were invited to a fundraiser? And what is a fundey bend. I am eager to learn English to impress the young adults who help
me, and have been to NYC and know it all.
idealist, Some lbgtq activists have advocated have boycotted them for the very reason you state. I was invited to a big fundraiser for them last year with a comp ticket, and I have to say at least here in Texas it had quite a “fundy” bend.
I will not give money to the Red Cross. I will not give money to the Cancer Fund here for the same reasons. It is a business, not acting in the public’s or its pwn declared interests.
I contribute to the Salvation Army, in spite of or perhaps because of their Christina motivations. The leadership does not pocket big salaries. And the aid reaches those who need it. Of that I am sure.
MikeS,
Compliments. You tie it all up again.
Let me add:
Romney is a little special. If we concentrate on his business career, ie its latter part as owner, board, and CEO of Bain Capital, he has been in a business that is always one of ONE SIDE WINS. There are no matters such as markets, logistics, etc to be considered when your game is raping companies of what is really left after you buy them for noll and pillage the real contents.
So he is obviously not a business man. The only knowledge he has is what his speechwriters has put in his mouth. Totally unqualified as President.
PS to ElaineM,
As to Nick S., well he supported me when you were giving me your patented treatment over occupational characteristics of teachers. (please specify, bla bla).
So I owe him one, and pay it back in spades times four.
ElaineM,
Bypassing all comments I rush here to assure you that I plan to stand on my right to tease you as long as you play the schoolmarm role. Kiss the baby for me, please.
I had colic, my brother said. Cried constantly and in those days no child was ever to be picked up for crying.
Wonder if it has effected my temperament. 😉
Nick,
Did you watch the video? It didn’t focus on the Red Cross. It includes a discussion of Romney’s dishonest campaign ads about the car industry shipping American jobs overseas.
This was the title posted above the video on the Youtube site:
Martin Bashir – Romney hardly hits pause on partisanship, false ‘Jeep’ ads post-Sandy.
Elaine, You video was about the Red Cross/Romney. I’m glad you donate to the Salvation Army. However, if you put up a video about the Red Cross you have to take some responsibility for it. I was giving a different take on the video Elaine posted. Should I have addressed it to Martin Bashir?
Nick,
I didn’t say anything about the Red Cross or the Salvation Army. I contribute to the Salvation Army every year.
Mitt Romney Style (Gangnam Style Parody)
Correction: A much HIGHER % of money to the Red Cross goes to administrative costs.
ElaineM, Ask serviceman or woman and anyone who has worked in a disaster area who is better, the Salvation Army or Red Cross. Hands down it’s the Salvation Army. I saw for myself in 2 disaster areas and know many servicemen who corroborate my experience. The Red Cross is a business run by the likes of Elizabeth Dole. The Salvation Army is a charity that use money and regular donations of food, water, clothing, etc. to help those in need. Red Cross just wants money and they have plenty of shills who abide that greedy message. The Red Cross has high paid execs and a much smaller % of money[that’s all they want] goes to administrative costs.
Nick,
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the Red Cross. I was at one point the budget director and at another the contracts director of a large NYC sub-Agency. Part of my job was to review contract proposals from non-profits seeking NYC contracts. What I learned about the Red Cross from meeting with their officials and reading the fine prit was that they were more public relations, than public helpers. Part of the review process was perusing their budgets and the salaries they paid. You are also correct about the highly paid executives and the excessive overheads.
Mitt Romney Crippled Model Anti-Smoking Program In Massachusetts
By Jason Cherkis & Zach Carter
Posted: 11/03/2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/03/mitt-romney-anti-smoking_n_2057840.html
Excerpt:
“We had the cure for cancer,” Connolly said. “It was the most exciting thing anyone could ever experience. We achieved the impossible.”
But 10 years into his crusade, Connolly met a tougher opponent than Big Tobacco: Mitt Romney.
While Romney’s signature achievement as governor was reforming Massachusetts’ health insurance system, axing cheap prevention in favor of pricey treatment was also a hallmark of his tenure. Romney attempted to eliminate or gut programs providing hearing tests for newborns, screenings for prostate and breast cancer, counseling for young parents, support for people living with severe physical disabilities, and suicide prevention services. The Democratic-controlled Legislature ultimately overruled him.
But before taking office in January 2003, Romney had promised the state’s anti-smoking advocates that he would increase funding to the tobacco-control program. Instead, he cut its budget from $5.8 million to $2.5 million, far below what it needed to be effective. Romney ignored the warnings of public health experts, while working to secure a tax cut for some of the state’s richest residents.
His efforts all but killed the program and serve as one of the most dramatic examples of his preference for short-term political gains over long-term health care solutions. Romney has continued this approach as the Republican nominee for president, vowing to repeal President Barack Obama’s health care reform law while insisting that emergency rooms provide effective treatment for the uninsured.
“We expected Mr. Romney to come in and restore the tobacco program to its level for the past 10 years and make himself a national hero,” said Connolly, now a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health, where he directs the Center for Global Tobacco Control. “But he did the opposite. … We got the Marlboro Man.”
Let’s talk about some of the issues raised by this excellent post in terms of the response of comments.
The Romney phony ad needed to be responded to forcefully by Chrysler because it was stupidly hurting that auto company’s image. It painted the company as un-American by moving jobs to China and also remember it referenced that the stake by Fiat was a foreign one, thus implying it was not a American Company to be supported. A third thing it showed was a lack of understanding of the auto industry by a supposedly “smart” businessman. The current thinking in the World Wide Auto industry is that you build cars in the country where you want to sell them, not for export. This is obvious because with shipping costs and trade restrictions it is less costly to build on site. GM piled on because the ads were attacks on the American Auto industry in general and therefore needed to be countered. These ads, like his ads disparaging the economy, show Romney and his campaign to be so intent on winning that they are willing to damage the country’s economy to accomplish it. If you think about it, it is really a stupid position for business friendly Republicans to take.
Chris Christie earned my respect in his remarks because they were one of a Governor looking first to protect his state, rather than slavishly devoting himself to party solidarity. This is a stance not taken often by today’s Republicans who are in the thrall and fear of, the tea baggers and fundamentalists. Many Republicans are beginning to jump the tea bag ship, realizing that it is only an effective strategy for mobilizing a minority of the vote. Economic self interest, or perception of same, is the real glue of the Republican Party. Being tied to people with antediluvian ideas of personal freedom and science is ot a formula that will continue to be a winning strategy.
Also what is effective about Christie is that his verbiage is closer to the common man, rather than the “Statesman” pose adopted by too many pols. Clinton is a more articulate example. Obama and Romney both attempt the same thing but Obama comes across as too professorial which bores some, while Romney frankly comes across as a supercilious, unlikable schmuck.
The other point about Christie is that coming from the Northeast he understands the idea that Republicans would be riding to their doom if the tea baggers/fundamentalists remain dominant. He has Presidential aspirations, can read the polls, sees Romney heading for defeat and is positioning himself strategically. I also think that he was probably promised a prominent role in the Romney campaign, but was pushed to the side after his widely criticized keynote address. I politics payback is a b*tch.
Finally I read Nate Silver daily and have been since 2008. If you’re for Romney, read it, weep and pray that somehow all the polls are biased towards Obama. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/
SeeiNEye, Bushie Two.rhymes with “Tushie Boo.”
“Tushie Boo” is Yiddish for “sorry a55.”