Out Of Context: Mitt Romney says he 'likes firing people'

Amerika

Mitt Romney will make the occasional gaff, and putting things like “I like” and “firing people” in the same sentence isn’t the best of political moves. But what’s really offensive is when the biased media chooses to take Romney’s comments, about one’s ability to decide and have some control on the quality of health care services provided by their insurance companies, out of context for pure political shock value intended to hurt Romney. Looks like the 2012 will be a repeat of 2008, with the media squarely in the democrats camp.

Their headline: Mitt Romney says he 'likes firing people'

What Mitt actually said.

"That means the insurance company will have an incentive to keep you healthy. It also means that if you don't like what they do, you could fire them. I like being able to fire people who provide services to me. You know, if someone isn't giving the good service, I want to say, I'm going to go get someone else to provide this service," he said.

The link (and it's the same type nonsense from the media over here): http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9003058/New-Hampshire-primary-Mitt-Romney-says-he-likes-firing-people.html

Mr.Micro

I heard the bit of his speech, and I do agree, totally out of context. After he said the line, he appeared to become a bit tongue tied, probably knowing he had made a gaffe. I cannot see it doing him much real damage, as sensible people will see it in context, unless of course he has a track history of firing people?

RichieC

Mr.Micro wrote: »

I heard the bit of his speech, and I do agree, totally out of context. After he said the line, he appeared to become a bit tongue tied, probably knowing he had made a gaffe. I cannot see it doing him much real damage, as sensible people will see it in context, unless of course he has a track history of firing people?

He made his fortune buying companies, liquidating their assets and sending the jobs over seas.

that comment will hurt him.

Suryavarman

RichieC wrote: »

He made his fortune buying companies, liquidating their assets and sending the jobs over seas.

that comment will hurt him.

Also a Gingrich SuperPac is planning on running a half hour film on Bain Capital in South Carolina which will further compound the damage caused by the comment.

If he gets the nomination that comment will come back to bite him in the general election.

Amerika

RichieC wrote: »

He made his fortune buying companies, liquidating their assets and sending the jobs over seas.

that comment will hurt him.

Hmmm... I can hop in my car, and within minutes (not having to take a flight to Vietnam or Bangladesh) drive to a Staples office supply store, a Domino's Pizza, or a Sports Authority. How is that possible?

But you are correct, after saving the 2002 winter Olympics from financial collapse, those jobs did go overseas four years later.

Carcharodon

Amerika wrote: »

Mitt Romney will make the occasional gaff, and putting things like “I like” and “firing people” in the same sentence isn’t the best of political moves. But what’s really offensive is when the biased media chooses to take Romney’s comments, about one’s ability to decide and have some control on the quality of health care services provided by their insurance companies, out of context for pure political shock value intended to hurt Romney. Looks like the 2012 will be a repeat of 2008, with the media squarely in the democrats camp.

Their headline: Mitt Romney says he 'likes firing people'

I totally agree but to bring up the same old flogged dead horse argument that right wing media sources such as Fox News have promoted this style for many years now. You live by the sword.....

Amerika

Carcharodon wrote: »

I totally agree but to bring up the same old flogged dead horse argument that right wing media sources such as Fox News have promoted this style for many years now. You live by the sword.....

To some extent all our news media does. I’d say I watch equal amounts of Fox News, CNN and MSNBC. To your point… IMO, Fox News (leans Right) more so than CNN (leans Left), and MSNBC (far Left) more so than Fox News. But to the topic at hand... Romney’s “I like to fire” comment seems to have been taken out of context and misconstrued quite on purpose by virtually all the news media here except for Fox News.

It’s not like a POTUS threw some over the top extravagant Halloween party at the White House during the most contentious period of our recession. Oops, I forgot, the media agreed to keep that bit of news secret from the public... which would surely have painted a negative appearance of the POTUS. I guess that's the polar opposite of taking things out of context (just making my point here )

And look at some of the comments by our gang here regarding this headline already. Either they only read the headlines, or they suffer from brain drain.

RichieC

Amerika wrote: »

Fox News, CNN and MSNBC. To your point… IMO, Fox News (leans Right) more so than CNN (leans Left), and MSNBC (far Left)

Repeating this every day doesn't make it true. Same with Politico, refereed to as the "lefist blog" on fox even though all it does it rubber stamps republican talking points.

you, Amerika are Far right. so everyone except fox will appear to be left leaning.

Amerika

RichieC wrote: »

you, Amerika are Far right. so everyone except fox will appear to be left leaning.

I might appear to be far right, but I can still tell bias in the media when I see and hear it.

always good reads
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx
http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/08/08/tim-groseclose-author-of-left-turn-answers-your-questions/

RichieC

That UCLA "study" said that the Drudge report was left wing. I stopped reading it.

lol the author of the study has a book out "Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind"

yea you can spot bias, can't you, Amerika... :rolleyes:

Amerika

Yeah... UCLA is a FAR RIGHT institution of higher learning. :D:D:D

Hmmm... Truth hurts sometimes... don't it?

timesnap

I always browse the politics forums on boards this thread as well as others about the standard of debate and the media in US politics having dropped to sound-bites and trying to please all the people all of the time by the candidates that happens now is such a contrast to this eight minute clip from 1967 between Ronald Reagan and Robert Kennedy.

just look at the good manners displayed by both in face of an agressive moderator.

Kennedy and Reagan were like chalk and cheese in their philosophy but they only attacked each others idea's without getting personal and digging up dirt to make a cheap smart remark.

i wish the debates by GOP candidates had been like this so far:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMzTcvXk1j4&feature=related

RichieC

Amerika wrote: »

Yeah... UCLA is a FAR RIGHT institution of higher learning. :D:D:D

Hmmm... Truth hurts sometimes... don't it?

Yes, every entire person is a leftie, including this guy. would try to be honest at least once?

spank_inferno

It was so far out of context it reminded me of the reactionary British media / thought police at their worst.

The statement was find, competition is good, choice lowers prices, its great to be able to kick a crap service provider to the kerb.

Mr.Micro

RichieC wrote: »

He made his fortune buying companies, liquidating their assets and sending the jobs over seas.

that comment will hurt him.

So effectively a corporate raider? If so, hence the impact. He looks like Stan in American dad, almost like a cardboard cutout.

RichieC

Mr.Micro wrote: »

So effectively a corporate raider? If so, hence the impact. He looks like Stan in American dad, almost like a cardboard cutout.

Precisely.

"the ad that never aired"

http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/the-romney-ad-that-never-aired/17yb7nhb8

timesnap

Amerika wrote: »

Hmmm... Truth hurts sometimes... don't it?

You mean Dubya's gentlemans C there don't ya Amerika :pac:

Amerika

timesnap... welcome to the fray.

Guilty as charged!

That was a time before 24/7 news. Both Reagan and Kennedy knew how to get things done and how to negotiate. For better or worse those times are gone and I doubt we will ever get back to them. The Far Right and Far Left get the attention of the news media and seemingly control the narrative, and it seems only a short month or two before the Presidential election that a moderate voice becomes heard - because that's when they appeal to the group that doesn't cancel each other out - the independents.

Amerika

timesnap wrote: »

You mean Dubya's gentlemans C there don't ya Amerika :pac:

I see it don't take much for one to get sucked into the soundbite crap.

RichieC

In 1992, Mitt Romney was running Bain Capital, a private equity firm. Bain Capital bought American Pad & Paper Co. (Ampad) for $5 million.

Over the next several years Romney's firm bled the company dry. Hundreds of workers lost their jobs. Stockholders were left with worthless shares. Creditors and vendors were paid less than 50 cents on the dollar. While they were exploiting the company, Romney's firm charged Ampad millions of dollars in "management fees." In all, Romney and his investors reaped more than $100 million dollars from the deal.

http://www.massresistance.org/romney/ampad_062607/index.html

timesnap

Amerika wrote: »

I see it don't take much for one to get sucked into the soundbite crap.

TBH are you not worried about the future of America when the only way to reach the whitehouse is to pretend to be more stupid than you are......... behave stupid to be 'one of the guys' or have to drop out if you are not extreme enough to either right or left?
that is why i brought up Reagan RFK, they could to a large extent present themselves as they really were,now it seems fatal to any candidate to be who they are without PC drowning them out.

jank

Must we always have this conversation every few months?
Blaming the media is always an easy excuse. This is a favorite pastime of Sarah Palin (who is now paid by Fox News). Mainstream media this, mainstream media that.... yes we know Sarah, your an idiot and we didnt need Katie Couric to find that out!

The only person in this race who can credibly say that the media is biased against them is Ron Paul.

Suryavarman

In fairness it's more the other candidates that are using this against him than the media. Although I'd like to see Romney fall in the polls, any Republican using this against him should be ashamed of themselves and are probably better suited to the Democrat Party.

pgmcpq

Amerika wrote: »

I might appear to be far right, but I can still tell bias in the media when I see and hear it.

always good reads
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx
http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/08/08/tim-groseclose-author-of-left-turn-answers-your-questions/

Both these links are from the same source : Tim Groseclose from UCLA.

From his website

To this day, I consider Goldwater one of my political heroes. Four others are Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp, Bob Dole, and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie. Four other heroes, in addition to being successful politicians, are true scholars: Newt Gingrich, Phil Gramm, Dick Armey, and Dick Cheney.

No bias at all !

Amerika

pgmcpq wrote: »

Both these links are from the same source : Tim Groseclose from UCLA.

So what did you think of the methodology utilized in the UCLA study?

Carcharodon

Amerika wrote: »

To some extent all our news media does. I’d say I watch equal amounts of Fox News, CNN and MSNBC. To your point… IMO, Fox News (leans Right) more so than CNN (leans Left), and MSNBC (far Left) more so than Fox News. But to the topic at hand... Romney’s “I like to fire” comment seems to have been taken out of context and misconstrued quite on purpose by virtually all the news media here except for Fox News.

It’s not like a POTUS threw some over the top extravagant Halloween party at the White House during the most contentious period of our recession. Oops, I forgot, the media agreed to keep that bit of news secret from the public... which would surely have painted a negative appearance of the POTUS. I guess that's the polar opposite of taking things out of context (just making my point here )

And look at some of the comments by our gang here regarding this headline already. Either they only read the headlines, or they suffer from brain drain.

I would have to strongly disagree with the highlighted part above, everyone with half a brain cell knows what a joke American media is but to say Fox news is more centered than MSNBC is ludicrous. Give credit to Fox news for not taking Romneys comments out of context but why would Fox try and discredit their own candidate.
Its not like like Fox have never engaged in such behavior is it ?

Fox news is an entertainment channel that engages in pseudo-journalism that distorts the news to serve its purpose so much, that fact and reality are lost in a sea of half-truths and innuendo.
It falls on the top of a pile of news channels that are just pure muck, all of them !

It has been discussed to no end so no point in discussing it any further.

Well if you consider the POTUS throwing what you perceive as an over extravagant Halloween party as an major issue then you must seriously skewed views on the major causes, issues and resolutions regarding the recession. But by all means concentrate on the Halloween party, image is everything I suppose and a way for you to manifest your political views.

Amerika

Carcharodon wrote: »

Well if you consider the POTUS throwing what you perceive as an over extravagant Halloween party as an major issue then you must seriously skewed views on the major causes, issues and resolutions regarding the recession. But by all means concentrate on the Halloween party, image is everything I suppose and a way for you to manifest your political views.

You obviously missed the point. If it were a republican POTUS who did something like this, during such a difficult time in our history, the majority of the media would have been ruthless and relentless against the republican POTUS. You could agree or disagree, but there are glaring double standards by the media when it comes to democrats and republicans IMO.

Fox news is an entertainment channel that engages in pseudo-journalism that distorts the news to serve its purpose so much, that fact and reality are lost in a sea of half-truths and innuendo.
It falls on the top of a pile of news channels that are just pure muck, all of them !

It has been discussed to no end so no point in discussing it any further.

Yet you.............. Ohhhhhh never mind.

RichieC

Amerika wrote: »

So what did you think of the methodology utilized in the UCLA study?

What do you think about it.

Carcharodon

Amerika wrote: »

You obviously missed the point. If it were a republican POTUS who did something like this, during such a difficult time in our history, the majority of the media would have been ruthless and relentless against the republican POTUS. You could agree or disagree, but there are glaring double standards by the media when it comes to democrats and republicans IMO.

Ha Ha Ha, :eek: No Way !!!
When did you figure that one out, of course there are double standards on both sides, which side is worse is just a matter of opinion i suppose.

Amerika wrote: »

Yet you.............. Ohhhhhh never mind.

Exactly, I will stick to NPR and BBC for news and Stewart & Colbert for entertainment.

Amerika

RichieC wrote: »

What do you think about it.

I thought it was pretty objective. How about you?

RichieC

Amerika wrote: »

I thought it was pretty objective. How about you?

Do you think if it was a liberal who conducted the study and found a conservative slant in the media you would be saying it was pretty objective?

Amerika

RichieC wrote: »

Do you think if it was a liberal who conducted the study and found a conservative slant in the media you would be saying it was pretty objective?

Questions, questions, questions... but no answers?

But to respond to your question... If the same standards were utilized, then yes.

And I highly doubt all those UCLA students who participated in the study were conservatives (if any as a matter of fact). Funny even thinking about it.

Suryavarman

Nice to see Ron Paul defending Romney against the Rinos demagoguery.

sarumite

Amerika wrote: »

So what did you think of the methodology utilized in the UCLA study?

It appears to me that they didn't take into account the angle of the story. For example they cite NAACP as left wing and Heritage as right wing. If a news organisation cites the NAACP more than Heritage it has a left wing slant. However it doesn't seem to take into account what the particular story was. Sometimes it may be relavant to cite the NAACP without requiring citation from another organisation. In terms of congressional times, again it doesn't seem to care about the relevance of the source, merely the politics of the source. I would say when reporting news, the relavance of a particular source is as important as to what political persausion one might assign it to.

Furthoremore as someone with experience of contributing to and citing from peer reviewed studeis, one paper does not by itself provide proof, it is just greater evidence. A body of evidence is usually required before a conclusion is taken as fact by the wider community.

Overall using the variables they studied, I am sure I would broadly agree with their conlcusions. However no study is perfect and I would say it is quite possible to get a different result by testing different, but equally valid, variables.

sarumite

Suryavarman wrote: »

Nice to see Ron Paul defending Romney against the Rinos demagoguery.

I don't like Ron Pauls politics, however he is a man of integrity. I personally have to agree with Paul but that said I have no sympathy for Romney. Romney is one of the worst demagogues out there. If Paul has said it, I have no doubt Romney would be one of the first to attack if he thought he could score political points.

pgmcpq

Amerika wrote: »

So what did you think of the methodology utilized in the UCLA study?

I would need to read the report in detail to really comment.
If based on the same psuedo "science" (PQ measure) as used in the website, then I'd say by any standards it is very poor. A visit to quantitative social research 101 would be valuable. Couple of immediate problems: There are many reasons why one might agree or disagree with a particular bill. One might oppose the practice of amendments that do not have any connection with the original subject of the bill. Including the resulting votes in the question also skews the results.

What's your opinion ?

However the issue is one of bias/of freedom from bias. Clearly the author has an agenda.

RichieC

Amerika wrote: »

Questions, questions, questions... but no answers?

But to respond to your question... If the same standards were utilized, then yes.

And I highly doubt all those UCLA students who participated in the study were conservatives (if any as a matter of fact). Funny even thinking about it.

Yes, questions, questions, questions, to defend a link you posted.

timesnap

sarumite wrote: »

I don't like Ron Pauls politics, however he is a man of integrity. I personally have to agree with Paul but that said I have no sympathy for Romney. Romney is one of the worst demagogues out there. If Paul has said it, I have no doubt Romney would be one of the first to attack if he thought he could score political points.

I like much of what Ron Paul says and agree that however off the wall his idea's may seem,he is a man of integrity,i also think that Romney would as you suggest have no hesitation in digging up dirt to score political points.

love him or hate him Paul is a very endearing character full of charm and wit and as another poster has suggested his Libertarian viewpoints may well lead to a President in the whitehouse who is a full-blooded Libertarian within the next twenty years.

It is my opinion that he ran to highlight that trying another way is worthy of consideration, to provoke debate, and shake people out of seeing things only in black and white.

He is too clever to think he would ever get the nomination as he well knows his age and somewhat fragile physical appearance would guarantee he would not win the election.

i have read some articles that suggest that he is on an ego trip,others saying he is a deluded old fool.

i disagree with all that, i think he is a true Patriot who puts his Country first and at heart cares about not just the US but also the right to humankind to also aspire to the right to life,love,and the pursuit of happiness.

i think he wants this message to be his legacy more than anything else.

RichieC

Yea I find myself liking the man more and more. whether that's because the other candidates are noting but theocratic Christian Taliban wannabes or corporate shills I can't tell.

RichieC

"Romney would hike taxes on poor 60%"

Republican Mitt Romney's tax plan would increase taxes on low-income families while cutting taxes for the middle-class and the rich, according to an independent study released Thursday.

On average, households making less than $20,000 would see their taxes increase by more than 60%, said the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group that studied the Romney plan.
Santorum's tax plan leaves hole in budget
Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 would get small tax cuts, averaging 2.2%, or about $250, the study said. People making more than $1 million would get tax cuts averaging 15%, or about $146,000.

"Virtually everybody with a big income is getting a tax cut," said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center.

Overall, Romney's plan would reduce tax revenues by $180 billion in 2015, adding to the federal budget deficit, the study said. Romney's campaign disputes the estimate, saying tax cuts in the plan would help improve the economy, leading to more revenue.

http://money.msn.com/tax-tips/post.aspx?post=0de0ad5d-1e48-4224-86b4-a8664b10fcf0&rrurt=0&rrcontrolid=ratCntrlBinary
:rolleyes:

InTheTrees

Amerika wrote: »

Mitt Romney will make the occasional gaff, and putting things like “I like” and “firing people” in the same sentence isn’t the best of political moves. But what’s really offensive is when the biased media chooses to take Romney’s comments, about one’s ability to decide and have some control on the quality of health care services provided by their insurance companies, out of context for pure political shock value intended to hurt Romney. Looks like the 2012 will be a repeat of 2008, with the media squarely in the democrats camp.

Their headline: Mitt Romney says he 'likes firing people'

Rommney should be more careful then.

Same thing happened to Kerry when he made the comment about being for the war before he was against it.

The republicans took it out of context and used it as a mantra for the rest of the campaign.

Politics can be brutal.

InTheTrees

The thing is... does mitt romney really believe the Garden of Eden is in Missouri?

timesnap

InTheTrees wrote: »

The thing is... does mitt romney really believe the Garden of Eden is in Missouri?

Depends on how many venture Capitalists live there i suppose!:pac:

Warren Buffet has been quoted today on CNN that he does not like what venture capitalists do, dive in like vultures,bleed a company dry and run with the money.
mind you Buffet is also going to broadcast live across China on their new year celebrations.

He has declared that on his death nearly all his money is going to the Bill Gates foundation when asked 'what about your Children/grand/great/children he replied,
"Oh i will leave them comfortable,but not so comfortable that they can sit on their ass all day!"

Oh to be so rich that i could be as eccentric as these guys!:)

jackiebaron

Amerika wrote: »

Mitt Romney will make the occasional gaff, and putting things like “I like” and “firing people” in the same sentence isn’t the best of political moves. But what’s really offensive is when the biased media chooses to take Romney’s comments, about one’s ability to decide and have some control on the quality of health care services provided by their insurance companies, out of context for pure political shock value intended to hurt Romney. Looks like the 2012 will be a repeat of 2008, with the media squarely in the democrats camp.

Their headline: Mitt Romney says he 'likes firing people'

What Mitt actually said.




The link (and it's the same type nonsense from the media over here): http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9003058/New-Hampshire-primary-Mitt-Romney-says-he-likes-firing-people.html

Doesn't really matter that he didn't come right out and say 'I like firing people'.....it masks the man's true beliefs.

Why could he not just come out and say 'I like being able to choose an alternative when I'm not given the service I expect for my money' ? Why couldn't he say that instead of doling out some quasi-macho horsesh!t?

You don't like the way you are treated in a certain shop? You take your custom elsewhere. You don't say 'I fired my grocer' like this clown says.

Oooh...."I fired my bank teller", "I fired my radio station", "I fired my video store" Such bollocks.

InTheTrees

jackiebaron wrote: »

Doesn't really matter that he didn't come right out and say 'I like firing people'.....it masks the man's true beliefs.

Why could he not just come out and say 'I like being able to choose an alternative when I'm not given the service I expect for my money' ? Why couldn't he say that instead of doling out some quasi-macho horsesh!t?

He's inept. He cannot relate to the ordinary people. And you cant fake it even though he's trying his hardest.

Remember the $10,000 bet he proposed in the debate? That was childish.

He has a condescending manner that really grates on people. Like when he was extolling on corporations being people. When he uses the phrase "my friend" it doesnt sound friendly and familiar it sounds arrogant.

Or his stumbling and bumbling over when and if he might possibly release his tax records.

InTheTrees

RichieC wrote: »

"Romney would hike taxes on poor 60%"

You really have to wonder about the repubs.

The only way they'll consent to any kind of tax raise on the top 1% is if health care for seniors is cut.

And they think this strategy will win them the election?

Unreal.

timesnap

InTheTrees wrote: »

You really have to wonder about the repubs.
The only way they'll consent to any kind of tax raise on the top 1% is if health care for seniors is cut.

It certainly does them no favours inthetrees.
A real pity that US politics has switched to either ultra right or ultra left wing,nothing in between.

I have read quite a few of presidents bio's and so often they were so much more clever than they were perceived to be.

That applies to either of the main party's.

Memnoch

Just curious what part of the mainstream American left do you consider to be extremist in US politics right now?

InTheTrees

timesnap wrote: »

It certainly does them no favours inthetrees.
A real pity that US politics has switched to either ultra right or ultra left wing,nothing in between.

There's polarization all right, but also remember the american "left" is a lot further right than any euro left wing. So the gulf may not be too wide.

timesnap

Memnoch wrote: »

Just curious what part of the mainstream American left do you consider to be extremist in US politics right now?

Hi Memnoch, i suppose i mean those who are against the budget deficit being reduced, but i do not like the Republicans solutions either.

imagine the Super committee who had only twelve members could not agree on budget cuts.

i honestly worry that if Americans do not pull together more it will become so insular that it will not give a damn about Europe.

If that happens a lot of Europeans will be sorry that they protested so much imo.

Memnoch

timesnap wrote: »

Hi Memnoch, i suppose i mean those who are against the budget deficit being reduced, but i do not like the Republicans solutions either.

imagine the Super committee who had only twelve members could not agree on budget cuts.

i honestly worry that if Americans do not pull together more it will become so insular that it will not give a damn about Europe.

If that happens a lot of Europeans will be sorry that they protested so much imo.

I don't understand. You talk about extreme left. Firstly, I don't think there are a lot of people on the left who are against the idea of reducing the deficit. I think the difference between the right and the left is that the left want to do it through sensible cuts and ALSO raising taxes on the wealthiest and on corporations where as the right seem to only want to cut, though the cuts they have proposed don't seem realistic to me. Especially since they want to ring fence defense spending in any such exercise.