Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Segami
Segami's Journal
Segami's Journal
October 26, 2012
Romney Happy To Get Off The Stage After Meat Loaf GOES CRAZY Singing “America The Beautiful” At Rall
October 25, 2012
Willard Romney has proven himself to be a compulsive liar throughout the Republican primary and during the general election campaign, and it appears it has been his practice in business as well. Lying in court is especially egregious, and there is a report that Willard Romney committed perjury in his friend’s divorce proceedings, and it is not the first time he is accused of perjuring himself. Romney often boasts that one of Bain’s success stories was the office supply chain Staples that his good friend Tom Stemberg founded. In 1988 when Stemberg was going through divorce proceedings, Romney testified on record that Staples stock was “over-valued,” and that he “didn’t place a great deal of credibility in the forecast of the company’s future.” Willard went on to testify that Stemberg spoke about the probability of success as if it was today and that “he minimized the risk and maximized the high probability of success, and the dream went on.” It was to Stemberg’s benefit to place little value on Staples stock to prevent his wife, Maureen Sullivan-Stemberg, from gaining from Staples equity and Romney’s testimony undervalued Stemberg’s primary asset in a fifty/fifty state.
However, if Romney truly believed Staples stock was “over-valued,” why was he, at the same time, making a deal between Stemberg and Goldman Sachs to take the company of no worth public? Because he was protecting his close friend from having to split fairly the assets from the marriage and depriving Stemberg’s ex-wife from her fair share according to the law. Some people may claim Romney made an honest miscalculation in not knowing if Staples stock was worthless or not, but as the first investor, a major shareholder, and board member, as with any corporation, he had a fiduciary responsibility to inform shareholders that the stock’s value was plunging. Either Romney lied about the worth of the stocks, or he was concealing the truth that Staples was a worthless investment and intended to fleece shareholders as he did in several other cases such as KB Toys. Romney was not a stupid investor or business man, and he claims Staples is his “proudest achievement” on the campaign trail, but to claim a company is worthless at the same time he was in talks to take the company public and make millions informs his willingness to either perjure himself in court or shirk his fiduciary duty as a Staples’ board member. This was not a flip-flop on Romney’s part, it was either a deliberate lie to benefit his friend and cheat his ex-wife, or conceal important investment information from shareholders, but based on the fact he was dealing with Goldman Sachs to take the company public, it appears Romney was lying to deprive his friends ex-wife from her fair share of the marriage assets. It is also not the first time Romney has been accused of committing perjury.
In bankruptcy cases, a cardinal rule “mandates all disclosures of conflict of interest,” and according to 18 USCS § 152 (3) “A person who knowingly and fraudulently makes a false declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1s746 of title 28, in or in relation to any case under title 11 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.” In 2001, Romney was “sole shareholder, director, and President of Sankaty Ltd. and thus is the controlling person of Sankaty, Ltd,” and Sankaty applied for payment of administrative expenses from Stage Stores, a company in which Romney was controlling shareholder, and by not disclosing conflict of interest, he committed perjury according to USCS § 152 (3). In a case often cited as precedent, a lawyer, failed to report conflict of interest and he went to prison, paid a fine, and settled for millions-of-dollars for simply not alerting the court he had a conflict of interest.
Willard Romney is a liar and there can be little doubt he failed to disclose conflict of interest in bankruptcy court. He also knew Staples was not a worthless company or he would not have been making a deal with Goldman Sachs to take the company public at the same time he told a judge Staples stock was “over-valued” and that he “didn’t place a great deal of credibility in the forecast of the company’s future.” In those business deals, Romney was not lying because “telling the truth was very awkward and uncomfortable while lying feels right,” he lied to deprive his friend’s ex-wife from her rightful due and to prevent his friend from losing half his Staples investment. He lies were purely for profit and not out of a pathological condition or mental disorder.
CONT'
http://www.politicususa.com/mitt-romney-dogged-decades-perjury-accusations.html
.
The Media Won’t tell You About Decades of PERJURY ACCUSATIONS Against Romney
"...A compulsive liar is a person who lies out of habit as their normal and reflexive way of responding to questions, and they typically lie about everything, large and small, and their habit makes telling the truth very awkward and uncomfortable while lying feels right...."
Willard Romney has proven himself to be a compulsive liar throughout the Republican primary and during the general election campaign, and it appears it has been his practice in business as well. Lying in court is especially egregious, and there is a report that Willard Romney committed perjury in his friend’s divorce proceedings, and it is not the first time he is accused of perjuring himself. Romney often boasts that one of Bain’s success stories was the office supply chain Staples that his good friend Tom Stemberg founded. In 1988 when Stemberg was going through divorce proceedings, Romney testified on record that Staples stock was “over-valued,” and that he “didn’t place a great deal of credibility in the forecast of the company’s future.” Willard went on to testify that Stemberg spoke about the probability of success as if it was today and that “he minimized the risk and maximized the high probability of success, and the dream went on.” It was to Stemberg’s benefit to place little value on Staples stock to prevent his wife, Maureen Sullivan-Stemberg, from gaining from Staples equity and Romney’s testimony undervalued Stemberg’s primary asset in a fifty/fifty state.
However, if Romney truly believed Staples stock was “over-valued,” why was he, at the same time, making a deal between Stemberg and Goldman Sachs to take the company of no worth public? Because he was protecting his close friend from having to split fairly the assets from the marriage and depriving Stemberg’s ex-wife from her fair share according to the law. Some people may claim Romney made an honest miscalculation in not knowing if Staples stock was worthless or not, but as the first investor, a major shareholder, and board member, as with any corporation, he had a fiduciary responsibility to inform shareholders that the stock’s value was plunging. Either Romney lied about the worth of the stocks, or he was concealing the truth that Staples was a worthless investment and intended to fleece shareholders as he did in several other cases such as KB Toys. Romney was not a stupid investor or business man, and he claims Staples is his “proudest achievement” on the campaign trail, but to claim a company is worthless at the same time he was in talks to take the company public and make millions informs his willingness to either perjure himself in court or shirk his fiduciary duty as a Staples’ board member. This was not a flip-flop on Romney’s part, it was either a deliberate lie to benefit his friend and cheat his ex-wife, or conceal important investment information from shareholders, but based on the fact he was dealing with Goldman Sachs to take the company public, it appears Romney was lying to deprive his friends ex-wife from her fair share of the marriage assets. It is also not the first time Romney has been accused of committing perjury.
In bankruptcy cases, a cardinal rule “mandates all disclosures of conflict of interest,” and according to 18 USCS § 152 (3) “A person who knowingly and fraudulently makes a false declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1s746 of title 28, in or in relation to any case under title 11 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.” In 2001, Romney was “sole shareholder, director, and President of Sankaty Ltd. and thus is the controlling person of Sankaty, Ltd,” and Sankaty applied for payment of administrative expenses from Stage Stores, a company in which Romney was controlling shareholder, and by not disclosing conflict of interest, he committed perjury according to USCS § 152 (3). In a case often cited as precedent, a lawyer, failed to report conflict of interest and he went to prison, paid a fine, and settled for millions-of-dollars for simply not alerting the court he had a conflict of interest.
Willard Romney is a liar and there can be little doubt he failed to disclose conflict of interest in bankruptcy court. He also knew Staples was not a worthless company or he would not have been making a deal with Goldman Sachs to take the company public at the same time he told a judge Staples stock was “over-valued” and that he “didn’t place a great deal of credibility in the forecast of the company’s future.” In those business deals, Romney was not lying because “telling the truth was very awkward and uncomfortable while lying feels right,” he lied to deprive his friend’s ex-wife from her rightful due and to prevent his friend from losing half his Staples investment. He lies were purely for profit and not out of a pathological condition or mental disorder.
CONT'
http://www.politicususa.com/mitt-romney-dogged-decades-perjury-accusations.html
.
October 25, 2012
Colorado voters think Obama was the winner of Monday night's debate by a 51/38 margin, and it seems to be having a positive impact on his approval numbers. 51% of voters give him good marks to 47% who disapprove, up from a 49/49 spread last week. Romney's favorability numbers are unchanged from a week ago with 48% of voters rating him favorably and 49% unfavorably. Voters trust Obama more on both the economy (50/46) and Libya (53/44) than they do Romney.
Obama has a 51/43 lead with independents. Beyond that his advantage is being driven by large margins with women (54/44), Hispanics (65/34), and young voters (60/35). Romney's main areas of support are with men (49/47), whites (52/46), and seniors (56/41).
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/ppp-poll-obama-leads-colorado-by-4-points
PPP Poll: Obama LEADS Colorado By 4 Points
President Obama has slightly expanded his lead in Colorado, according to a new survey released Thursday from Democratic-leaning Public Policy Polling. Obama gets 51 percent of likely voters to Romney's 47 percent in their new poll, a small tick up from the 50 percent to 47 percent advantage the president held over Romney in PPP's polling from a week ago. From their analysis:
Colorado voters think Obama was the winner of Monday night's debate by a 51/38 margin, and it seems to be having a positive impact on his approval numbers. 51% of voters give him good marks to 47% who disapprove, up from a 49/49 spread last week. Romney's favorability numbers are unchanged from a week ago with 48% of voters rating him favorably and 49% unfavorably. Voters trust Obama more on both the economy (50/46) and Libya (53/44) than they do Romney.
Obama has a 51/43 lead with independents. Beyond that his advantage is being driven by large margins with women (54/44), Hispanics (65/34), and young voters (60/35). Romney's main areas of support are with men (49/47), whites (52/46), and seniors (56/41).
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/ppp-poll-obama-leads-colorado-by-4-points
October 25, 2012
While national Republicans have done their best to shore up Indiana Senate nominee Richard Mourdock after his statements on rape, conception and God’s will, many Republicans in tight Senate races have backed away from Mourdock’s comments, trying to keep the negative headlines that have followed Mourdock’s statements out of their races.
But the Republican nominee for Senate in Ohio, Josh Mandel, has taken a very different approach. He’s given Mourdock a big ol’ bear hug. Ahead of Thursday’s debate between Mandel and incumbent Democrat Sherrod Brown, Democrats say they plan to make Mourdock a big topic on stage.
“I would bet it will,” Brown spokesperson Sadie Weiner told TPM when asked whether Mandel’s handling of Mourdock will come up in the debate. Mandel is unafraid to embrace Mourdock, despite the controversy surrounding him.
“Listen, I’ve gotten to know Richard [Mourdock] because we’re both state treasurers and — we’re treasures in states next door to each other,” Mandel told radio host Laura Ingraham Thursday. “He’s a gentleman. He’s a class act. He’s a thoughtful guy. He’ll make a great United States Senator.”
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/josh-mandel-richard-mourdock-sherrod-brown.php?ref=fpa
BUH-BYE!!- Josh Mandel: Mourdock’s A ‘Class Act’!- OH GOP Nominee BEAR HUGS His Indiana Counterpart
While national Republicans have done their best to shore up Indiana Senate nominee Richard Mourdock after his statements on rape, conception and God’s will, many Republicans in tight Senate races have backed away from Mourdock’s comments, trying to keep the negative headlines that have followed Mourdock’s statements out of their races.
But the Republican nominee for Senate in Ohio, Josh Mandel, has taken a very different approach. He’s given Mourdock a big ol’ bear hug. Ahead of Thursday’s debate between Mandel and incumbent Democrat Sherrod Brown, Democrats say they plan to make Mourdock a big topic on stage.
“I would bet it will,” Brown spokesperson Sadie Weiner told TPM when asked whether Mandel’s handling of Mourdock will come up in the debate. Mandel is unafraid to embrace Mourdock, despite the controversy surrounding him.
“Listen, I’ve gotten to know Richard [Mourdock] because we’re both state treasurers and — we’re treasures in states next door to each other,” Mandel told radio host Laura Ingraham Thursday. “He’s a gentleman. He’s a class act. He’s a thoughtful guy. He’ll make a great United States Senator.”
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/josh-mandel-richard-mourdock-sherrod-brown.php?ref=fpa
October 25, 2012
Former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice broke with the majority of her party last night on Fox News, as she tried to hit the brakes on the right wing’s politicization of the recent attack in Libya.
Host Greta Van Susteren asked Rice directly and repeatedly about a set of emails uncovered by Reuters. In what has been dubbed “Benghazi-Gate,” the conservative media has jumped on the emails as definitive proof that the Obama administration has been lying about what it knew and when in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attack on a diplomatic mission in Benghazi. Rice’s response was likely not what Van Susteren expected:
RICE: But when things are unfolding very, very quickly, it’s not always easy to know what is really going on on the ground. And to my mind, the really important questions here are about how information was collected. Did the various agencies really coordinate and share intelligence in the way that we had hoped, with the reforms that were made after 9/11?
So there’s a big picture to be examined here. But we don’t have all of the pieces, and I think it’s easy to try and jump to conclusions about what might have happened here. It’s probably better to let the relevant bodies do their work.
Throughout the interview, Rice highlighted the difficulty that comes in a “fog of war” situation, with multiple stories coming in which need to be processed and verified. Her statements strongly align with the evolution of the Obama administration’s understanding of what happened in Benghazi. Rice also joined current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in dismissing the big picture importance of the emails from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, as a small portion of the overall communication between the mission and the State Department.
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/25/1089691/condi-rice-pours-cold-water-libya/
Condi Rice POURS COLD WATER On ‘Benghazi-Gate’
Former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice broke with the majority of her party last night on Fox News, as she tried to hit the brakes on the right wing’s politicization of the recent attack in Libya.
Host Greta Van Susteren asked Rice directly and repeatedly about a set of emails uncovered by Reuters. In what has been dubbed “Benghazi-Gate,” the conservative media has jumped on the emails as definitive proof that the Obama administration has been lying about what it knew and when in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attack on a diplomatic mission in Benghazi. Rice’s response was likely not what Van Susteren expected:
RICE: But when things are unfolding very, very quickly, it’s not always easy to know what is really going on on the ground. And to my mind, the really important questions here are about how information was collected. Did the various agencies really coordinate and share intelligence in the way that we had hoped, with the reforms that were made after 9/11?
So there’s a big picture to be examined here. But we don’t have all of the pieces, and I think it’s easy to try and jump to conclusions about what might have happened here. It’s probably better to let the relevant bodies do their work
Throughout the interview, Rice highlighted the difficulty that comes in a “fog of war” situation, with multiple stories coming in which need to be processed and verified. Her statements strongly align with the evolution of the Obama administration’s understanding of what happened in Benghazi. Rice also joined current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in dismissing the big picture importance of the emails from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, as a small portion of the overall communication between the mission and the State Department.
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/25/1089691/condi-rice-pours-cold-water-libya/
October 25, 2012
Jon Huntsman, former Utah governor and 2012 Republican presidential candidate, said on Thursday that Mitt Romney showed a lack of leadership with his response to Indiana GOP Senate nominee Richard Mourdock's controversial comments on rape and abortion. Romney has refused to withdraw his endorsement of Mourdock and declined to have the campaign ad he filmed for him pulled from TV.
"If I were Romney I simply would have said I'm withdrawing my support," Huntsman said in an interview with HuffPost Live. "Until [Mourdock] proves otherwise, either you lay out an apology, do something else, but as of right now I would withdraw support." Asked by The Huffington Post's Howard Fineman if he would have had the ad taken off air, Huntsman responded, "I would do exactly that."
"I'm here to tell you that there are some independents and swing voters in the middle that I think would respect a candidate who goes against the grain," Huntsman continued. "They're looking for leadership during a time that these kinds of statements are made, as opposed to just the go-with-the-flow kinds of statements we always hear." Huntsman condemned Mourdock's comments, saying they "don't deserve to be part of our political discourse right now." "I cringe -- it's like fingers on a chalkboard every time I hear men talk about women's health issues," he said.
Romney has not directly responded to Mourdock's remark, made during the final Indiana Senate debate Tuesday night, that pregnancies caused by rape are "something that God intended to happen." Democrats immediately seized on the comment, tying it to Romney, his running mate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), and other GOP candidates.
cont'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/jon-huntsman-mitt-romney-richard-mourdock_n_2017322.html
.
Jon Huntsman SLAMS Romney For NOT WITHDRAWING Mourdock Endorsement
Jon Huntsman, former Utah governor and 2012 Republican presidential candidate, said on Thursday that Mitt Romney showed a lack of leadership with his response to Indiana GOP Senate nominee Richard Mourdock's controversial comments on rape and abortion. Romney has refused to withdraw his endorsement of Mourdock and declined to have the campaign ad he filmed for him pulled from TV.
"If I were Romney I simply would have said I'm withdrawing my support," Huntsman said in an interview with HuffPost Live. "Until [Mourdock] proves otherwise, either you lay out an apology, do something else, but as of right now I would withdraw support." Asked by The Huffington Post's Howard Fineman if he would have had the ad taken off air, Huntsman responded, "I would do exactly that."
"I'm here to tell you that there are some independents and swing voters in the middle that I think would respect a candidate who goes against the grain," Huntsman continued. "They're looking for leadership during a time that these kinds of statements are made, as opposed to just the go-with-the-flow kinds of statements we always hear." Huntsman condemned Mourdock's comments, saying they "don't deserve to be part of our political discourse right now." "I cringe -- it's like fingers on a chalkboard every time I hear men talk about women's health issues," he said.
Romney has not directly responded to Mourdock's remark, made during the final Indiana Senate debate Tuesday night, that pregnancies caused by rape are "something that God intended to happen." Democrats immediately seized on the comment, tying it to Romney, his running mate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), and other GOP candidates.
cont'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/jon-huntsman-mitt-romney-richard-mourdock_n_2017322.html
.
October 25, 2012
ProgressMass debunks Republican Scott Brown's TV ad entitled "Gail" by sharing facts about Brown's real record on women.
For more research and background on Republican Scott Brown's record, visit
http://www.ProgressMass.org/
and Follow us on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/ProgressMass
and Like us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/ProgressMass
Words Can't ERASE Scott Brown's VOTES AGAINST WOMEN
ProgressMass debunks Republican Scott Brown's TV ad entitled "Gail" by sharing facts about Brown's real record on women.
For more research and background on Republican Scott Brown's record, visit
http://www.ProgressMass.org/
and Follow us on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/ProgressMass
and Like us on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/ProgressMass
October 25, 2012
This video shows how Republicans STOLE the 2000 Election, by wrongly identifying thousands of black people as convected felons and disqualifying them to vote. BUSH should not have been President. Republicans clearly FIXED the 2000 election and those responsible should be BROUGHT TO JUSTICE. BUSH was a ILLEGITIMATE President
How Republicans STOLE The 2000 Election
This video shows how Republicans STOLE the 2000 Election, by wrongly identifying thousands of black people as convected felons and disqualifying them to vote. BUSH should not have been President. Republicans clearly FIXED the 2000 election and those responsible should be BROUGHT TO JUSTICE. BUSH was a ILLEGITIMATE President
October 25, 2012
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/25/1149718/-Obama-s-new-comedy-DVD-You-Just-Might-Have-Romnesia
LOL! -Obama's NEW Comedy DVD: "...You Just Might Have Romnesia!"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/25/1149718/-Obama-s-new-comedy-DVD-You-Just-Might-Have-Romnesia
October 25, 2012
Let all your friends and neighbors know WHO the 40 REPUBLICAN HYPOCRITES were who stabbed Vets in the back.
Jon Stewart ripped the 40 Republican senators who blocked the Veterans Job Corps Act of 2012 that would have created jobs for vets. Stewart summed it up by calling them ‘a**holes.’
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-24-2012/world-of-warshaft
Senate Republicans blocked the legislation that would have created 20,000 jobs for veterans on September 19, and then quickly and quietly hightailed it out of town. At the time of the original story, some Republicans asked where was the list of Democrats who voted against this? They didn’t seem to comprehend that every Democrat voted to advance this legislation.
It is great to see Jon Stewart bringing attention to this deplorable political behavior, but these Republican senators should not be left off the hook.
Here is the list of the 40 Republican senators who stabbed our veterans in the back:
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lee (R-UT)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moran (R-KS)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
If you are like Jon Stewart, and believe that this is just a Senate issue, think again.
Seven of the Republican senators who voted against jobs for vets are also high profile Mitt Romney surrogates. Rob Portman, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, John McCain, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte all occupy high visibility positions in the Romney campaign, and they all voted against creating jobs for veterans.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/jon-stewart-rips-40-a-hole-gop-senators-blocked-jobs-vets.html
.
GOP House Of BULLSHITTERS: List of the 40 Republican Senators Who STABBED Our VETERANS In The Back
Let all your friends and neighbors know WHO the 40 REPUBLICAN HYPOCRITES were who stabbed Vets in the back.
Jon Stewart ripped the 40 Republican senators who blocked the Veterans Job Corps Act of 2012 that would have created jobs for vets. Stewart summed it up by calling them ‘a**holes.’
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-24-2012/world-of-warshaft
Stewart said,
As divided as America is there are still a few things we can agree on. One, popcorn is corn, so for dietary purposes it does count as a vegetable, and number two. (Video of Candy Crowley reporting on a CNN poll that found by a margin of 85%-14% respondents said it more important prevent cuts in veterans’ benefits than reducing the deficit.) Stewart said, “Wait, but the 14, who are the a**holes the 14% that say reducing the deficit is more important than our obligation to our veterans. Who are the a**holes? (Video of Chuck Todd reporting that 40 Republican senators blocked a jobs bill for vets because it was too expensive.)
Let me be absolutely clear about what happened here, forty Republican senators thought it would be wrong to spend a billion dollars on a bill to help reintegrate veterans into the domestic workforce partly because of the amount of money we had already gladly spent on wars that made them veterans in the first place.
As divided as America is there are still a few things we can agree on. One, popcorn is corn, so for dietary purposes it does count as a vegetable, and number two. (Video of Candy Crowley reporting on a CNN poll that found by a margin of 85%-14% respondents said it more important prevent cuts in veterans’ benefits than reducing the deficit.) Stewart said, “Wait, but the 14, who are the a**holes the 14% that say reducing the deficit is more important than our obligation to our veterans. Who are the a**holes? (Video of Chuck Todd reporting that 40 Republican senators blocked a jobs bill for vets because it was too expensive.)
Let me be absolutely clear about what happened here, forty Republican senators thought it would be wrong to spend a billion dollars on a bill to help reintegrate veterans into the domestic workforce partly because of the amount of money we had already gladly spent on wars that made them veterans in the first place.
Senate Republicans blocked the legislation that would have created 20,000 jobs for veterans on September 19, and then quickly and quietly hightailed it out of town. At the time of the original story, some Republicans asked where was the list of Democrats who voted against this? They didn’t seem to comprehend that every Democrat voted to advance this legislation.
It is great to see Jon Stewart bringing attention to this deplorable political behavior, but these Republican senators should not be left off the hook.
Here is the list of the 40 Republican senators who stabbed our veterans in the back:
Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Blunt (R-MO)
Boozman (R-AR)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coats (R-IN)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (R-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lee (R-UT)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Moran (R-KS)
Paul (R-KY)
Portman (R-OH)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rubio (R-FL)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Toomey (R-PA)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)
If you are like Jon Stewart, and believe that this is just a Senate issue, think again.
Seven of the Republican senators who voted against jobs for vets are also high profile Mitt Romney surrogates. Rob Portman, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, John McCain, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte all occupy high visibility positions in the Romney campaign, and they all voted against creating jobs for veterans.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/jon-stewart-rips-40-a-hole-gop-senators-blocked-jobs-vets.html
.
Profile Information
Member since: Tue May 13, 2008, 03:07 AMNumber of posts: 14,923
