jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (7 posts)

In Defense of Mitt Romney

  1. 0
    Sooner28posted 4 years ago

    Okay, this will only be a partial defense.  Those of you who see me post on a regular basis know I am solidly left, but I don't like lying about small facts that are easily verifiable, regardless of which side does it.  I have extended a lot of energy talking about Romney's lies, so I figured I'd go after Obama.

    President Obama told Governor Romney in last night's debate, "You were very clear that you would not provide government assistance to the U.S. auto companies even if they went through bankruptcy.  You said that they could get it in the private marketplace. That wasn't true." (my emphasis)

    Now to me, this initially sounds like quite a devastating attack.  Obama has pinned Romney down, citing the very op-ed Romney wrote.- http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/opini … .html?_r=0

    However, Obama was not technically correct on the point that Romney was against government assistance AFTER managed bankruptcy, but he was against it before."IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed."

    According to the Los Angeles Times, "The bipartisan Congressional Oversight Panel, the government-appointed watchdog for the $700-billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, backs Obama on this. It said in a January 2011 report that private financing was not available for General Motors and Chrysler in late 2008." 

    So far, we can see that it is true that Romney was not in favor of government financial help BEFORE the managed bankruptcy, but, in Romney's article Let Detroit Go Bankrupt, he specifically claimed, "The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk." (my emphasis)

    The whole crux of the issue rests on the fact that the auto industry likely would not have been able to get private financing BEFORE the bankruptcy, and, citing the Los Angeles Times once again, "Without government financing — initiated by President George W. Bush in December 2008 — the two companies would not have been able to pursue Chapter 11 reorganization. Instead they would have been forced to cease production, close their doors and lay off virtually all workers once their coffers ran dry."

    So in essence, Obama was wrong on the point about Romney providing post-bankruptcy financing for the auto industry, and he should give George Bush some credit for GM and Chrysler's turnaround.

    I'm now ready to be eviscerated. tongue

    1. Repairguy47 profile image60
      Repairguy47posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      We knew obama lied when he said it. Not exactly anything new with him.

    2. habee profile image90
      habeeposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I was going to make this same post. Good work!

      1. 0
        Sooner28posted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Fair is fair!

  2. 0
    JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago

    I mostly agree. Thanks for looking at it objectively!

    1. 0
      Sooner28posted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I have moments of objectivity from time to time

      1. 0
        JaxsonRaineposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Me too! wink