Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Romney speaking intelligently on the Fed in Mother Jones video...

  1. #1

    Default Romney speaking intelligently on the Fed in Mother Jones video...

    I was reading the transcript of the video and was surprised to see Mitt say this. Still not voting for the guy but if this is the supposedly "candid" Mitt Romney, there's not a whole lot to hate in this snippet:

    Audience member: The debates are gonna be coming, and I hope at the right moment you can turn to President Obama, look at the American people, and say, "If you vote to reelect President Obama, you're voting to bankrupt the United States." I hope you keep that in your quiver because that's what gonna happen. And I think it's going to be very effective. Just wanted to give you that.

    Romney: Yeah, it's interesting…the former head of Goldman Sachs, John Whitehead, was also the former head of the New York Federal Reserve. And I met with him, and he said as soon as the Fed stops buying all the debt that we're issuing—which they've been doing, the Fed's buying like three-quarters of the debt that America issues. He said, once that's over, he said we're going to have a failed Treasury auction, interest rates are going to have to go up. We're living in this borrowed fantasy world, where the government keeps on borrowing money. You know, we borrow this extra trillion a year, we wonder who's loaning us the trillion? The Chinese aren't loaning us anymore. The Russians aren't loaning it to us anymore. So who's giving us the trillion? And the answer is we're just making it up. The Federal Reserve is just taking it and saying, "Here, we're giving it.' It's just made up money, and this does not augur well for our economic future.

    You know, some of these things are complex enough it's not easy for people to understand, but your point of saying, bankruptcy usually concentrates the mind. Yeah, George.

    Audience member, "George": Governor, to your point on complexity. How is—you've traveled around America and talked to people in larger groups and perhaps people with different backgrounds, and people in this room: To what extent do people really understand that we're hurtling toward a cliff, and to what extent do people understand the severity of the fiscal situation we're in. Do people get it?

    Romney: They don't. By and large people don't get it. People in our party, and part of—it's our fault because we've been talking about deficits and debt for about 25 or 30 years as a party, and so they've heard us say it and say it and say it. The fact that Greece is going what it's going through, and they read about France and Italy and Spain, has finally made this issue topical for the American people. And so when you do polls, and you ask people what is the biggest issue in the 2012 election, No. 1 is the economy and jobs by a wide margin. But No. 2 is the deficit. But debt, that doesn't calculate for folks, but the deficit does. They recognize you can't go on forever like this. Although the people who recognize that tend to be Republicans, and the people who don't recognize that tend to be Democrats. And what we have to get is that 5 or 10 percent in the middle who sometimes vote Republican, sometimes vote Democrat, and have them understand how important this is. It's a challenge. I did the calculation for folks today, and USA Today publishes this every year. It's a front-page story: the headline once a year, it somehow escapes people's attention, and that is, if you take the total national debt and the unfunded liabilities of Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid, the amount of debt plus unfunded liabilities per household in America is $520,000. Per household.

    Audience member: It's like 12 times their income, right?

    Romney: At least. 10, 12 times their income. Even though we're not going to be writing the check for that amount per household, they're going to be paying the interest on that. You'll be paying the interest on that. [Audience laughs.] Because we—my generation will be long gone, and you'll be paying the interest. And so you'll be paying taxes, not only for the things you want in your generation, but for all the things we spent money on, which is just—it's extraordinary to think the tax rates, someone calculated what would happen. If we don't change Medicare or Social Security, the tax rate—you know what the payroll tax is now, it's 15.3 percent—if we don't change those programs, that tax rate will have to ultimately rise to 44 percent. The payroll tax. Then there's the income tax on top, which the president wants to take to 40 percent. Then there's state tax in most states. And sales tax. So you end up having to take 100 percent of people's income. And yet the president, three and a half years in, won't talk about reforming Social Security or Medicare. And when the Republicans do, it's "Oh, you're throwing granny off the cliff." It's like you're killing the kids. The biggest surprise that I have is that young people will vote for Democrats. They look at this and say, "Holy cow! The only guys who are worried about the future of our country and our future are Republicans." But the Democrats, they talk about social issues, draw in the young people, and they vote on that issue. It's like, I mean, there won't be any houses like this if we stay on the road we're on.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    He is the banks' candidate.

    He absolutely knows what to SAY.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden

  4. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sailingaway View Post
    He is the banks' candidate.

    He absolutely knows what to SAY.
    It just seems interesting that we never hear anything substantive about the Fed from Romney, even in these more recent months as he's been making his (weak) token effort to try to appeal to libertarian types. And yet, that opening paragraph, which he said behind closed doors and all the way back in May, sounds like something straight out of a Ron Paul speech.
    Last edited by economics102; 09-20-2012 at 05:39 PM.

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by economics102 View Post
    It just seems interesting that we never hear anything substantive about the Fed from Romney, even in these more recent months as he's been making his (weak) token effort to try to appeal to libertarian types. And yet, that opening paragraph, which he said behind closed doors and all the way back in May, sounds like something straight out of a Ron Paul speech.
    When these people tell the truth, it's because they are discussing strategy. It's not like they are trying to help "We the People". They are not stupid. In 1913 they knew these things, and have used them to steal everything from "We the People". They are calculated.
    "When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law

    "nothing evil grows in alcohol" ~ @presence

    "I mean can you imagine what it would be like if firemen acted like police officers? They would only go into a burning house only if there's a 100% chance they won't get any burns. I mean, you've got to fully protect thy self first." ~ juleswin

  6. #5

    Default

    Romney: Yeah, it's interesting…the former head of Goldman Sachs, John Whitehead, was also the former head of the New York Federal Reserve. And I met with him, and he said as soon as the Fed stops buying all the debt that we're issuing—which they've been doing, the Fed's buying like three-quarters of the debt that America issues. He said, once that's over, he said we're going to have a failed Treasury auction, interest rates are going to have to go up. We're living in this borrowed fantasy world, where the government keeps on borrowing money. You know, we borrow this extra trillion a year, we wonder who's loaning us the trillion? The Chinese aren't loaning us anymore. The Russians aren't loaning it to us anymore. So who's giving us the trillion? And the answer is we're just making it up. The Federal Reserve is just taking it and saying, "Here, we're giving it.' It's just made up money, and this does not augur well for our economic future.

    You know, some of these things are complex enough it's not easy for people to understand, but your point of saying, bankruptcy usually concentrates the mind. Yeah, George.
    Basically, Romney in that video, said the GAME IS OVER.

    For once he told the truth. And if he is accurate--and I believe he is--it won't matter WHO wins the presidency.

    We are DONE. Going down. Economically collapsed already and unsaveable.

    I am sure Romney, like with so many OTHER things he has said, was sticking his foot in his mouth. AGAIN. But, basically this gaffe...which tells people it won't MATTER who they vote for because we are "done-for" is PROBABLY THE ONLY TRUTH TOLD IN THE ENTIRE 2012 CAMPAIGN by anyone...other than Ron Paul.

    What Romney did was outline "the end". As he has SO-OFTEN...even with the Queen...not used words well, I think Romney was being "dim" (cause the truth that who you vote for WON'T MATTER sure doesn't help him), but he accidentally stumbled and blabbed a truth.

    In my opinion.
    Last edited by jolynna; 09-20-2012 at 06:06 PM.
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. – Benjamin Franklin

  7. #6

    Default

    This is the same guy that also wants to triple the size of the military, but he seemed intelligent enough here that the "He's just an ordinarily corrupt dummy following orders" argument doesn't really hold much water. At this point, I can only see two reasons for his position:
    a. He sees what's coming and wants us to fight our way out of it in World War III.
    or
    b. He sees what's coming and is knowingly, willfully working on behalf of the military industrial complex and financiers to squeeze the last few drops out of us. I mean this in a sense that goes beyond being a mere puppet.

    Personally, I think I'd rather that he were just a complete moron who couldn't see what's coming, because at least that would feel less sinister.
    Last edited by Mini-Me; 09-21-2012 at 11:46 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by President John F. Kennedy
    And we must face the fact that the United States is neither omnipotent nor omniscient. That we are only 6% of the world's population, and that we cannot impose our will upon the other 94% of mankind. That we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity, and that therefore there cannot be an American solution to every world problem.
    I need an education in US history, from the ground up. Can you help point me to a comprehensive, unbiased, scholarly resource?

  8. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mini-Me View Post
    This is the same guy that also wants to triple the size of the military, but he seemed intelligent enough here that the "He's just an ordinarily corrupt dummy" argument doesn't really hold much water. At this point, I can only see two reasons for his position:
    a. He sees what's coming and wants us to fight our way out of it in World War III.
    or
    b. He sees what's coming and is knowingly, willfully working on behalf of the military industrial complex and financiers to squeeze the last few drops out of us.

    Personally, I think I'd rather that he were just a complete moron who couldn't see what's coming, because at least that would feel less sinister.
    I would say (b) is likely. They see what's coming, will milk what they can. New currency, the old converted into it, they end up with all of the wealth, we get new pennies. (but it could start (a))
    Last edited by ClydeCoulter; 09-20-2012 at 07:09 PM.
    "When a portion of wealth is transferred from the person who owns it—without his consent and without compensation, and whether by force or by fraud—to anyone who does not own it, then I say that property is violated; that an act of plunder is committed." - Bastiat : The Law

    "nothing evil grows in alcohol" ~ @presence

    "I mean can you imagine what it would be like if firemen acted like police officers? They would only go into a burning house only if there's a 100% chance they won't get any burns. I mean, you've got to fully protect thy self first." ~ juleswin

  9. #8

    Default

    Well, now we know why Rand Paul fell for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul
    Perhaps the most important lesson from Obamacare is that while liberty is lost incrementally, it cannot be regained incrementally. The federal leviathan continues its steady growth; sometimes boldly and sometimes quietly. Obamacare is just the latest example, but make no mistake: the statists are winning. So advocates of liberty must reject incremental approaches and fight boldly for bedrock principles.
    The epitome of libertarian populism

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Feeding the Abscess View Post
    Well, now we know why Rand Paul fell for it.
    Perhaps, but not necessarily. The VERY first thing my mind jumped to when I read Romney's words here was the contradiction with his "triple our military" stance. Is it really reasonable to assume this same realization has totally escaped Rand Paul? Rand has already committed to tailoring his image to conservatives and (Iran sanctions aside) his votes to libertarians. That's not my thing, but it's something that's very possible to do without actually believing that Romney is trustworthy.

    I know we both prefer Ron Paul speaking truth to power and throwing out libertarian red meat, but imagine for a moment that you believed the most important thing you can do is to gain the office of President as soon as possible to bring some of the worst abuses to a screeching halt: I know you don't believe that, and I don't think I do either, but imagine for a moment that you did. Imagine you were actually acting on that premise and courting a conservative audience to achieve that goal, while hoping libertarians would be smart enough to look at your record instead: If that were the case, don't you think you might come off a lot like Rand Paul does? I know I would...if I had read a little too much Sun Tzu, that is. As for who I really am, I couldn't stomach it...but I can relate to those who could. Actually, I have to admit I entertained a similar idea as a strategic possibility back in 2008, before I had ever even heard of Rand Paul, so it comes as little surprise to me that someone is actually trying it. There are a lot more interpretations here than "He's being sucked in, and he fell for it."

    A lot of people don't like it, and it really runs into conflict with our trust issues, but it's pretty clear to me that the guy is playing chess. His voting record demonstrates it, and reframing the war issue as a Christian issue alongside abortion is evidence of it as well. It's just how he rolls. This notion that he's completely oblivious to what he's up against just doesn't strike me as realistic, and I think you aren't giving him enough credit here. From what I've seen, it seems a lot of forum members are just too revolted by his pandering or the mere thought of someone who plays the game deceptively to acknowledge that genuine allies might feel otherwise and actually pursue this avenue. (He's not living up to Ron Paul's image, so there's therefore something "wrong" with him.)

    I recognize that you believe the best (perhaps only) way to fight this fight is to be a shining beacon of truth and blast rays of sunlight out of your butt, and there's little that I find more heroic than that too. Still, our own opinions on this issue are irrelevant to an objective assessment of Rand Paul: Once you fully accept that other people actually do legitimately believe otherwise, the additional context should reveal why their actions make perfect sense from the standpoint of their own assumptions. If you want to actually understand people who differ from you on the pragmatism issue, you have to look at them through the lens of their own stance on it, "as if they were right," because looking at them through your own eyes and biases is bound to result in a distorted and overly pessimistic conclusion.

    A lot of people believe Rand Paul's strategy is a stupid one, and perhaps they're right (we'll see), but people have taken this subjective assessment to the point of assuming the only possible explanations for Rand's pandering are that he's a gullible moron or corrupt. In reality, I think the disconnect comes from some people being so unable to stomach what Rand is doing that they're no longer able to even comprehend that he might be fighting the same fight as us from a different angle (flanking, really). Is he a pragmatist who thinks differently from many of us? Undoubtedly. Does that make him a complete idiot who actually trusts Romney, just because many of us find flaws in pragmatism? No.

    Here's the part I find so bizarre: The knowledge that a lot of other smart people view the same person from a totally different perspective seems to have no bearing on some people's self-certainty that there are only a couple ways to view Rand (gullible moron or corrupt traitor), and this makes no sense to me. As evidenced by this debate even existing between people who otherwise agree on so much, there are clearly other valid interpretations of his motives and competence that are perfectly consistent with his behavior (regardless of anyone's beliefs about how effective Rand is going to be). A positive interpretation exists (even if we don't agree with his choices), and considering his voting record, I think he's earned the benefit of that doubt. You don't have to like him or get behind him, but assuming he's really drinking Romney's kool-aid is just insulting.
    Last edited by Mini-Me; 09-21-2012 at 11:56 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by President John F. Kennedy
    And we must face the fact that the United States is neither omnipotent nor omniscient. That we are only 6% of the world's population, and that we cannot impose our will upon the other 94% of mankind. That we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity, and that therefore there cannot be an American solution to every world problem.
    I need an education in US history, from the ground up. Can you help point me to a comprehensive, unbiased, scholarly resource?

  11. #10

    Default

    Yes I saw ZH report on this snippet. This is the most important part of his comments, yet the media wants to quibble about the minutia of the 47%. These comments are the happiest I've been with Romney the entire election. No way am I voting for him, but at least he can say a truth once in awhile.






Similar Threads

  1. Arizona Mother Facing Jail Time for Speaking out Against Medical Kidnapping
    By Created4 in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-18-2015, 08:18 AM
  2. {Article} Mother Jones at it again.
    By BUSHLIED in forum Media Spin
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-28-2011, 09:10 PM
  3. Mother Jones: 'Don't Believe the Ron Paul Hype'
    By green73 in forum Media Spin
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-10-2011, 09:20 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-22-2009, 07:25 PM
  5. Mother Jones: Paul's Apostles
    By DrNoZone in forum News About The Official Campaign
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-17-2007, 08:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •