It does not matter to me that Mitt Romney is rich. He earned his money and he has a right to enjoy all the benefits of the wealthy. I am really not interested in his tax returns. He’s rich and he has offshore accounts, tax shelters and every other kind of legal device to maximize his profits, but what does make me pause is his “retroactive retirement”. Now that phrase was uttered by Ed Gillespie on Meet the Press Sunday and that is ridiculous. If Romney left Bain in 1999 as he claims it is puzzling that his name appears on company documents two years later. To try to wipe it away by saying he retroactively retired is simply a crock. Americans might not understand the ends and outs of high finance, but Americans are not stupid and this line of defense is just that–stupid.
-
Live Feed
Comments
You seem to really want controversy to exist where there is none. It is perfectly understandable that an issue such as this is beyond your ken. Unless one has had experience as an entrepreneur, corporate officer or formal business training it is understandable that they do comprehend what occured betweem Romney and Bane.
The key fact to this issue is that Romney was still the owner of the company post departure. So consequently it was necessary for his name to appear on various documents after he departed. That fact alone in no way indicates whether or not he played an active role. It is not unusual for an owner even as an officer of the company to not be involved in day to day decisions concerning the business.
If you’re that convinced that Romney did something untoward or illegal, report him to the Securities and Exchange Commission. But even the not so friendly to Republicans organization FactCheck.org has discredited this charge.
http://factcheck.org/2012/07/factcheck-to-obama-camp-your-complaint-is-all-wet/
As for Ed Gillespie’s retroactive retirement explanation, it sounds as senseless to me as it does to you. But that doesn’t change the facts.
Sometimes I forget just how condescending you can be. This not beyond my comprehension this is simply stupid. His names were on the document long after he claimed he had no dealings with Bain. that is clear and I am not looking for a controversy, but I recognize it when I see it. It is great to support a candidate but take the blinders off and see that Romney like Obama has faults too.
There you go making assumptions. I am not a Romney supporter although I do believe he would be immensely more effective than what we currently have. I must say that in some ways it seems almost unfair to compare them in that Romney has had the opportunity to garner real world experience and achieve measurable results. But I’m holding our for Ron Paul.
I’ll have to work on maintaining mind share that you won’t forget what I’m really like.