Sure. He was a lecturer at the Law School while I was a grad student (and an adjunct) at the GSB. The law, business and economics schools are quite close to one another in the sense that we work together often. Edit: Oops. I didn't mention the extent. I've had casual interactions with him at cocktail mixers, eaten lunch with him at the Quadrangle Club, have been to numerous functions with he and his wife, etc. He and Michelle know who I am and knew the kind of work I did at the U of C. I would characterize what relationship we had as casual acquaintences.
What do you think Bain Capital does? I think his money was much more honorably earned than John Kerry's, the Kennedy family's, George W. Bush's, John McCain's, Sarah Palin's, Bill Clinton's or Barack Obama's. If you his money was earned dishonorably, the burden is on you to explain why.
no it's not silly. The burden is on you to turn the tide explaining to the general public why they're misunderstanding things. I'd suggest that they'll probably need more convincing then just saying... I'm an internet poster who goes by the handle maxiep and I think MR's money was much more honorably earned then various other politicians... trust me. STOMP
I did you the courtesy of directly answering your questions, yet you can't answer mine. I'll be happy to explain why he earned his money more honorably. Simply answer my question as to what you think Bain Capital does. Don't pretend to wrap yourself up in public opinion. Even after the tens of millions in negative advertising without much of a rebuttal, it hasn't gained much traction.
Many Democrats in Obama's circle have worked or endorsed private equity firms. Don't worry this is just a waste of time, everyone knows what Bain did is no different than what Obama's co-chair did. Obama is simply a d-bag that's desperate to win by any means, no different than Shit Flopney. http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/24/obama-national-co-chair-works-in-private-equity-like-romney/
Obama has released 7 years of tax returns. Hilary Clinton released 20 years. You're right, I don't get your point because you don't have one. His wealth is a known entity. Everyone and their car-roof-riding dog knows he's filthy rich. Is Mutt embarrassed by his obscene wealth because he didn't come by it honestly? Is he afraid his offshore accounts and foreign holdings might seem un-American or shady? Might even lead to him being in jail for some serious time? Might prove he's lying about where he worked and lived at various times, committing tax fraud? Please explain it to me.
And every time I email them to ask if it's true, their handlers reply "so and so has never even heard of maxiep!"
Okay, I'll go with your source: By Tom Hamburger, Published: June 21 Mitt Romney’s financial company, Bain Capital, invested in a series of firms that specialized in relocating jobs done by American workers to new facilities in low-wage countries like China and India. During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission... ...But a Washington Post examination of securities filings shows the extent of Bain’s investment in firms that specialized in helping other companies move or expand operations overseas. While Bain was not the largest player in the outsourcing field, the private equity firm was involved early on, at a time when the departure of jobs from the United States was beginning to accelerate and new companies were emerging as handmaidens to this outflow of employment. Bain played several roles in helping these outsourcing companies, such as investing venture capital so they could grow and providing management and strategic business advice as they navigated this rapidly developing field. Over the past two decades, American companies have dramatically expanded their overseas operations and supply networks, especially in Asia, while shrinking their workforces at home. McKinsey Global Institute estimated in 2006 that $18.4 billion in global information technology work and $11.4 billion in business-process services have been moved abroad. ... http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...obs-overseas/2012/06/21/gJQAsD9ptV_story.html
You impress with the volume of your writing here. You'd be more impressive, though, if you identified yourself. Then you could drop names more often and refer to your experience more specifically. You'd be like a KingSpeed or an HCP, someone we're honored to know, even if we disagree with you. I initially learned accounting from a consultant who had 3 masters degrees. As an engineer he had helped develop equipment for VietNam helicopters to track and kill peasants on the ground. After he got to know you he would mention that he had worked for the CIA. He then went into the Big 8. Then he became an accounting professor (the CIA plants its contacts into academic circles). I later went back for the degree and took 3 classes from him. I even hired him to consult at one of my jobs. As someone on the left I saw his intelligence as soon as I first worked with him. He was my shining light at my first accounting job, though I can't stand his politics. You sound similar. My point is that your traction on this board derives from volume (I gave up arguing with you on BBB--you wore me out), but if you identified some of these jobs you've had, you would gain more authority over we your opponents.
Americans aren't above other groups of people, there's nothing wrong with poor people getting jobs in Asia.
I didn't want to be rude, but I think your answer to my shoe question was BS which is why I asked it after your initial post here where you gave it. The Republicans engage in this same sort of big time politics 101 constantly and you never say a word of protest. If you didn't always speak up in support of just one side and against the other, you probably wouldn't be concerned about appearing as a partisan hack. btw... since he's gotten in bed with the social conservatives, the Romney campaign isn't looking to leave the public alone in their private lives as you claim to want again, you misunderstand. It doesn't matter what I as a single voter think Bain Capital does, especially since it's a foregone conclusion which way the state I live in will vote. Nor does it really matter if you share your opinions on how various politicians earned their $ to the rest of us on this obscure chatsite. What matters is what the general population in the undecided states think, and like it or not those polls absolutely do show BO's side gaining traction. Mitt's hollow "trust me" rebuttals have come all along but not worked... more and more voters want to see his tax returns. It would matter if you could convince those voters of what you think is what http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/120626-JUNE-NBC-WSJ.pdf STOMP
I don't really think it matters what the polls say, since most people are unwilling to give up their free lunch. Elections are just popularity contests, not a barometer of who is the best candidate.
If that were true, Bain's American companies would pay their Asian employees the same they were paying the American employees they replaced them with. Face it, Romney made his hundreds of millions of dollars by exploiting slaves, mostly children. He's in the same league as Sandusky.
Clinton plea bargained (roughly) with the special prosecutor. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...001/01/what_sort_of_plea_did_clinton_cop.html President Clinton and Independent Counsel Robert Ray agreed Friday to settle the seven-year Whitewater probe. The president admitted that he gave misleading testimony in the 1998 Paula Jones case about his affair with Monica Lewinsky, accepted a five-year suspension of his Arkansas law license, and promised to cover $25,000 in legal fees related to disbarment proceedings against him in Arkansas. In exchange, Ray agreed not to indict Clinton on perjury charges. What kind of agreement is this? ... The Clinton-Ray agreement occupies a legal space somewhere between a declination and a plea bargain. Ray declined to indict Clinton for criminal perjury (as in a declination), but he also struck a deal that requires Clinton to admit his evasions in the Jones proceedings and to pay a price (as in a plea bargain). --- He was then disbarred by the state of Arkansas and the Supreme Court of the United States. http://www.nytimes.com/2000/05/25/opinion/mr-clinton-s-disbarment-case.html In recommending that President Clinton be disbarred for providing false testimony in the Paula Jones sexual harassment case, a disciplinary committee of the Arkansas Supreme Court has called for the harshest sanction at its disposal. The false testimony at the root of this matter came in 1998 during a deposition in the lawsuit by Paula Jones alleging that Mr. Clinton, while governor of Arkansas, had sexually harassed her. At one point Mr. Clinton, in attempting to deflect questions designed to show a pattern of bad behavior, denied having had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. The President contended then, and continues to maintain, that he did not technically lie because the activities he engaged in with Ms. Lewinsky did not fit the definition of sexual relations used in the trial. That argument was demolished by Judge Susan Webber Wright, who presided over the Paula Jones case. Cutting to the core issue, she found that the president had given ''intentionally false'' testimony under oath, fined him $90,000 and referred the matter to the disciplinary committee that has now recommended disbarment. --- http://articles.cnn.com/2001-10-01/..._court-term-rehnquist-supreme-court?_s=PM:LAW The Supreme Court Monday announced that former President Bill Clinton is suspended from practicing law before the High Court.The Court, in a one-sentence order said, "Bill Clinton, of New York, New York, is suspended from the practice of law in this Court, and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court."As is its custom, the Supreme Court gave no explanation for its order.Supreme Court observers say such suspensions nearly always lead to permanent disbarments.
