It is not so much that they aren't listening as it is that they don't think the words that come out of his mouth bear any relation whatsoever to what he would do if elected.

Who can believe anything Romney says at this point. An effective ad would only have to show is a pair of flip flops with the name Romney scrolling across the screen. Enough said.

You can look at those differing campaign messages and see it right there. Romney is going to say anything that fits the moment, tactical situation, etc. And that plays into his biggest negative, going into his most important state contest yet (maybe the most important of the election cycle), while discussing that state's icon industry.

He's got a real problem here.

Sort of like Obama huh? I'll cut the deficit in half, etc. etc. blah blah blah.

"How in the world did an industry and its leaders and its unions get in such a fix that they lost jobs, that they lost their future?” Romney says in a new TV ad. “President Obama did all these things that liberals have wanted to do for years. The fact that you’ve got millions of Americans out of work, home values collapsing, people here in Detroit are distressed.”

Comment over @ The Obama Diary: History of US Bailouts:

Penn Central Railroad - 1970 (Nixon)
Lockhead - 1971 (Nixon)
Franklin National Bank - 1974 (Nixon)
New York City - 1974 (Ford)
Chrysler - 1980 (Carter)
Continenta­l Illinois National Bank - 19­84 (Reagan)
Savings & Loan - 1989 (H.W Bush)
Airline Industry - 2001 (Bush 43)
Bear Stearns - 2008 (Bush 43)
Fannie Mae/ Freddie Mac - 20­08 (Bush 43)

American Internatio­nal Group (AIG) - 2008 (Bush 43)
Auto industry - 2008 (Bush 43)
Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) - 2008 (Bush 43)
Citigroup - 2008 (Bush 43)
Bank of America - 2009 (Bush 43)
GM and Chrysler - 2009 (Obama)

****************

"I saw my father march with Martin Luther King."

"I purchased a gun when I was a young man. I've been a hunter pretty much all my life."

Romney is a parody of the utterly vacuous man.

Nothing he says has any meaning, and he says anything.

Any comment he has made since November 2 2008 solely reflects his need to mindlessly attack President Obama.

I hope Willard loses the Michigan primary - just to see the crap-eating grin on his face when he realized he can't play flip-flop games forever with no consequences.

If he loses Michigan GOP will revolt and he will not be the nominee.

Penn Central Railroad, Franklin National Bank, Continental Illinois, Bear Stearns. None of those companies exist anymore. AIG barely exists. Freddie and Fannie continue to suck funds from the tax payers.

Chrysler, turns out, had to be bailed out twice. Citigroup and Bank of America are still not in good shape right now. GM still owes the taxpayers billions of dollars, the stock has to double for the government to break even, and the executives just gave themselves another round of nice bonuses.

The airlines ---- Eastern Air, Northwest Air, Continental no longer exist after any government support they received. AMR is going bankrupt and UAL has gone bankrupt twice.

All of these are good cases to illustrate why "bailing out" doesn't work.

All the money from TARP was paid back.....mostly because banks who didn't need the bail out were forced to take it.

It's not the government's place to bail out failing companies, and it's no great accomplishment to do so.

You have brought up some valid points Candice. While some companies fail after receiving bailouts, some don't and that is why I can't get on board with the government taking a hands off approach to bailouts.

If the government had failed to assist GM and others, the ramnifications of unemployment and loss of revenue to the country would be astronomical. There are so many other people who supply parts to major manufacturers that many of us don't think about. But they exist nonetheless and many of those still working and the companies they work for are still thriving because of the bailouts.

Just because one or more people or companies fail after receiving a government loan or bailout is no reason in my opinion to discontinue future loans or bailouts. If a company the size of Lockheed, GM or Chrysler can be saved, it was worth it.

More emphasis has to made on overturning certain laws that continue to enable companies to grow so large that they can't fail. AIG and Citigroup are two major examples.

We need to overturn the existing laws so that more companies can thrive and to create better competition so that all Americans live a better life. Without competition we all suffer. Before Chase, BankofAmerica, Wells Fargo and other banking giants were able to grow to their current size by buying up the competition, we all experienced better rates and service. We didn't have to worry about a bank deciding how much they would charge us for any and every notion they can think of. When there was more competition, we wouldn't stand for it and we'd move our money to another bank. Now it would be like moving our money from the fire to the inferno. Either that or moving our money to a savings and loan (my personal choice) and watch as the large giants crumble because of their greed.

The bottom line is that we should all be thankful that we have a government that is there when we need them that will help when it is reasonable to do so.

Candice, Penn Central was nationalized, along with a bunch of smaller railroads. I forget what it was called after - Conrail maybe? Yeah, I think so. It later was privatized again as CSX, which is a solid railroad today and which owns all the rails in the country. Everyone else - BNSF, Norfolk Southern, Amtrak, etc., pays CSX to use the rails.

Penn Central was folded into Conrail. Conrail has been sold out to CSX and Norfolk Southern in bits and pieces over the years. CSX certainly doesn't own all the rails in the country. That would come as a huge surprise to Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific and BNSF to name a few. Amtrak pays to use the rails of whatever railroad they are riding on.

With GM, there was some solid dirty pool played. The stockholders of that company took a bath. The government stepped in and turned the stock over to the unions. There were major losses to the investors when Obama got his hands in it. As far as I'm concerned GM was used as a tool by this administration to help unions that worked for GM. Had GM been allowed to file for BR and given the chance to reorganize, they would have emerged a leaner, smarter and better company. As far as I'm concerned GM was used by this administration to win votes by the union workers there. What union worker wouldn't vote for Obama now that he has given them a share in the company even though the company owes the taxpayers billions.... Pure political manipulation by a dishonest president.

Wayne - Amtrack is heavily subsidized by the federal government. Every year Amtrack shows a loss and hasn't made a profit in I don't know how long. They are like the post office... not really owned by the government, but if the government didn't bail them out every year, they wouldn't be running trains.

Brian i opened this comment from my "ignore " list to let you know . Your comments about the "post office" are as usual for you wrong . If you would actually tell the truth sometimes , you would not be on my ignore list . to each his own brian b .

nomoresameo,

Pat listed 17 companies that the government bailed out. 6 of 17 are simply gone. 7 of 17 are barely hanging on. 4 survived. That's not a good track record.

There's a moral hazard here too and you touched on it when you cited the concept of "too big to fail" and too big to compete. There's no incentive for General Motors, American or United Airlines to get it together, seriously restructure their business models and turn into leaner, smarter, better companies, like Brianb points out. If the "safety net" of tax payer support is out there, these businesses won't make the hard decisions and won't learn from their mistakes. I understand that keeping these companies afloat and keeping the employees employed is a major concern.....but the pension plans and benefits the employees are promised are unfunded, insolvent and these people are going to be in a pickle when the plans they were told to count on aren't there for them. That's hardly compassionate to string these people along and make promises that can't be kept. (the government is good at that, isn't it?)

Who's to say a structured bankruptcy - under current law and not at the expense of the tax payers - wouldn't have turned out exactly the same? If GM or Chrysler fell out, would Ford, Nissan and Toyota picked up the slack? I think the surviving companies would've thrived by all the new business. Suppliers who sold to GM would have sold their parts to Ford. I don't know. Just speculating.

I totally agree with you regarding competition. The repeal of the laws that allowed companies to swallow their competition and merge into behemoths started it all. It got out of control. And the people suffer for that.

Brianb - You are absolutely right the way GM was "saved" smacked of cronyism, and, worse, a rewriting of the law. That sets a bad precedence. That GM's executives are taking their second round of bonuses - (under the guise of sacrificing pay raises) - pensions are still unfunded, their products continue to be massively subsidized, just makes the whole thing harder to support.

The capital markets and free enterprise have been around for a long time. Only the strong survive. That's how it should be.

Thanks for chiming in, all. Lots of good points to think about.

Carpenter,

Brianb is correct. The post office is an independent agency of the Government. It operates on its own - from revenues it generates. It is not tax payer funded. It is also a mess. It can't cover it's employees wages, operating expenses and pension promises with the revenue it brings it. It's closing offices and people are losing their jobs, and pensions, and benefits. All because of the lack of vision found in successful companies -- that ability to adapt to from buggy whips to new technology.

Amtrak, too, has been on the brink every year for years. If the government didn't bail them out annually, the business would have gone under long ago.

BrianB -- you betray your ignorance of bankruptcy laws. Shareholders come last in every distribution of assets in bankruptcy, unless the creditors who come ahead of them in the priority list agree to allow them to retain an interest in the reorganized company (it's called the "absolute priority rule"). Creditors -- such as the unions -- can decide to accept stock for their monetary claims and object to any distribution to shareholders. That is what happened in the GM bankruptcy -- investors were going to get the short end of the stick no matter who ran the bankruptcy case (and the bankruptcy case itself may have lasted longer and been more expensive if the US Government had not used its leverage as a lender to strongarm the various factions into accepting a plan).

Most bankruptcy professionals I know view the GM bankruptcy as an extremely successful outcome for all creditors -- not just the unions.

Since deficits matter so much to the Republicans and they can't raise taxes on the 1% and they want to start another war so they can't cut military spending, just how does Mitt expect to pay for this increased spending?

I think there must be some sort of strategy in his flip flopping. Even a broken clock is right twice a day, and sooner or later you will hear something from Romney that you agree with. The problem is if he is only right twice a day, who's listening?

I find it hard to believe many people in Detroit will be listening. He has zilch to offer them.

JoAnne, it's mind boggling to read comments like Romney's in the past and then listen to his and other GOP howls today. Their dislike and hate for anything President Obama does or suggests has pushed them to the point where they no longer make any sense at all. They should be embarrassed but they're too stuck on stupid to be embarrassed.

No matter your political philosophy, economic beliefs, education or occupation if you can't find something likable in Willard's pronouncements, you just are not reading closely enough. He's against what he's fur and fur what he's against. Is it a bailout, handout, bankruptcy, partnership or subsidy he likes or don't like.

Takes me back to last fall when Newter was explaining to us why "Consulting" is more gentlemanly than "Lobbying"

dangerfield,

Why do I need Dramamene to keep up with Gov. Romney's positions?

Phine-

We may have to refuse you that medication, on RELIGIOUS principle.

Also, Nausea is the one true road to understanding the rolling, undulating, landscape of the Governor's 'positions"

Romney is simply pathetic. Please, who want this money bag...........anyone?

dangerfield, I would settle for some Pepto! LOL

And Pen-24, I would settle for some of Mr. Romney's money in my bank account. :)

phine

you'll have to dig holes like a rabbit to find this uncompromising baron hidden treasures. IRS's lost sight of them.

Just ask the wife - she always knows where a husband tries to hide something! LOL

she's an accomplice.

So, Pen-24, what you are telling me is a won't be receiving a "gift" of money from Gov. Romney. Alas. LOL!!!

I am not even gonna think about voting republican , until grover norquist has been hung . and every last one of the tards that signed his oath before their oath of office to US , is gone . to me its very simple , oath taken to the UNITED STATES of AMERICA or oath taken to a lobbyist . I will not sling around the TRAITOR thing , because that is the ONLY crime defined in the Constitution . But Its CLOSE

how does the govt effect private business?

Amy,

The governor of Michigan during it's decline was Democrat Jennifer Granholm (2003 to 2011). Isn't the mayor of Detroit in Jail now and Congressman Dingell's wife is also in jail for bribes, and other political crimes. So how do you figure it was a Republican President's fault? I know blame Bush just like Obama and the liberals always do.

I hate to be the downer here but all political rhetoric and blame gamesmanship aside could it possibly be Detriot brought itself to its knees by producing a largely crappy product? And, has the American auto industry truly recovered?

Let's put it this way Mark, this is a global problem, not just an American problem. GM is now selling more cars than anyone else in this country or anywhere else. They are ahead of Toyota. They are not where they were in 2007 by any means, but they are definately making a comeback along with Ford and Chrysler. Lately Toyota has had to deal with quality control, and along with the devastation they suffered during the tsunami, they have fallen behind. Meanwhile in talking to my many friends who are mechanics, they think the quality in American cars has risen dramatically. The unionized American auto industry is coming back, and it is pissing off republicans everywhere!

Toyota's temporary setbacks are part of the reasons I question the strength of GM's recovery. Toyota will overcome, they will most definitely be strong again and when they are will GM still be able to compete? The Japanese demonstrate an uncanny ability to adapt and move on, much more so than we do. A large part of our overall economic recovery has to be a willingness at all levels to realize that it is no longer "business as usual."

Wayne, I was with you until your concluding sentence. I am just so tired of partisian sniping here. Republican or Democrat I just can not imagine someone being pissed off about the American auto industry recovering. Recovery benefits us all.

My point in the last sentence makes perfect sense. Republicans were solidly against bailing out the auto industry. They want to kill unions and they want non union car assemblers (rather than car makers) in the south to thrive at the expense of the American auto industry. Killing unions is on the top of the list because of the support Democrats get from them. There is also the problem of the president's support of the auto industry succeeding. That is a problem for the GOP, particularly Romney. You are right, recovery benefits us all, except for the reputation of the republican party. My point made in the last post is valid Mark. The GOP hates to face the president's triumphs, and sews a series of lies and distortions to trivialize his success.

Pat -

When I read your post, all I could think of was that over the weekend I finally sat down and watched "Up In The Air", in which George Clooney plays a guy who loves being - well, in his character's own words, "I work for a company that lends me out to cowards that don't have the courage to sack their own employees". Translation: "I like firing people". Anyway, American Airlines must have paid some big bucks for product placement, because their planes and their check-in counters are in almost every other scene. Kind of makes you wonder why they'd be so happy to be co-starring in a movie about firing people......or maybe it doesn't.

Too bad this article just came out - "I'm not a job creator. I'm a job cremator" would have been a great movie tagline. I can just hear Romney Clooney saying it now.....

The American taxpayer will be absorbing the cost of the lost pensions by law. I'm no lawyer but it seems to me that we need to be prosecuting or in some way hold CEOs accountable who ignore the rules and short-fund the contractually agreed upon pension funds then declare bankruptcy in order to avoid responsibility.

Jody, Iowa American Airlines is funding it's own bankruptcy. A small portion of the employees pensions will be funded by a Federal pension fund but many of the workers could lose a large portion of their pensions. Yes it does seem shady but it's been going on for years in the airline industry.

JoAnne,

That was an excellent movie & not hard on the *eyes* at all... ;o)

When I first saw it, all I could think about was the correlation to Willard the coward!

The airline industry has been getting hammered by both external factors and its own hubris. The cold, hard fact is that lots of airline workers have, are, and will loose their jobs. $525,000 a month to Bain could end up being a bargain if American Airlines comes out the other side stronger, and willing to make the necessary changes in order to be competitive in changing environment. Much more than many other businesses the airline industry can no longer function as it has been and expect to survive.

"Up in the Air," a very entertaining movie! I must say I was completely broadsided by the show-up-at-the-girlfriend's-house scene.

Jody what AA is doing is all perfectly legal. Shining example of where reforms are necessary. AA is not bankrupt in the simple sense of the word, it has lucrative subsidiaries in several other countries. This is purely a union busting tactic and a way to get out of paying pensions EARNED by employees. Any international corporation can find legal ways to move money and assets around that make one part of the corporation look weak while in reality the money/assets have been moved off shore. This is what companies like Bain exist to do. Until there is reform in laws that would prevent companies from dissolving pension funds as one example, this will continue to happen.

magnificent50,

I read or heard that the Fed official in charge of the pension insurance program saw this coming. He put liens on AA property assets . He wants to save the pensions as best he can.

I do know that airlines have huge assets in real estate all over the world. Northwest had owned property in Japan for decades. It was worth a fortune. Dont know what happened to it when they merges with Delta.

Thanks for clarifying that the word bankrupcty has many layers of meaning.

All airline unions are not created equal. What is the status of the pilot's union pension?

it will all be a stimulus for paper companies, one that should be near and dear to your state, ad agencies, tv stations, radio ads, all revenues for businesses, why even the USPS will benefit with all the mailings that will go out. Now tell me this, what private company is forced to fund their pension fund 75 years out like USPS?

Applause, Buck. the law forcing the USPS to fund pension 75 years out was a Republican move to destroy it, to make UPS, FedEx, and a couple of other private carriers the primary mail movers. The devastating effect this would have on rural America can not even be imagined.

it should be an easy fix

When gas prices skyrocketed in 2008, were they President George Bush's gas prices or is this like the deficit for republicans, it only matters when a democrat is President?

No president controls the price of gas, take your complaint to the oil speculators and the gasoline makers. If President Obama froze gas prices, the republicans like you would be the first to squawk about interfering in private business.

It is also the midwestern state republicans and citizens who do not want Keystone XL destroying their water supply, who asked for the delay and it was the GOP in DC who demanded a quick answer despite the warning from President Obama that more time was needed--you should study up on that.

It is the states which determine whether or not they want off shore drilling. If the government took away the state's right to make that decision, republicans like you would be squawking about state's rights.

P.S. At least learn to spell his first name correctly.

Republicans do not want freedom from dependance upon foreign oil, not really. Too much money to be made for Wall street and oil guys, the Koch brothers would be angry. If Republicans were serious about eliminating our dependance upon foreign oil, they would be moving legislation to invest in alternative energy sources. No, we aren't technologically able to use wind and solar on a widespread basis, but neither were we able to fly all over the world, into space, or even drive cars until the technology was created. As long as wind and sunlight are free and not sold like oil and gas, the Republicans will not vote for funding research to make solar and wind viable for all.

Obama's gas prices??? Don't think much, do ya??

Jody--I think he figures no union folks are going to vote for him anyway so at least he can keep the 1% happy.

Winemaker,

What's that Chevy Volt cost?? $43,000 base price?? And what's it's range?? 40 miles?? And what is the life of that battery pack and what does it cost to replace it??

Oh, but this is the "green" way to travel. But.....what is the upstream polution for generating all that electricity?? Very quiet about all that. Can it run an A/C for the full 40 miles?? How about resale value?? Who would buy a "used" volt??

This should be renamed the Obama "Dream" Collectors might want one. Like buying an Edsel.

Obama shelved in 2012.

I take that back. You can't name a car after Obama. People would think it only turns left. LOL

That's funny!

Denoid - I think the movie was called "Flipper"

bob you have zero basis for calling Obama a "failed president". The failures of Congress are laid at the feet of the Republican party of "NO". Despite the Congress of No, Obama has still managed to move legislation through that helps the 99% and helps the economy move forward He would have done more, had it not been for Boehner, Cantor, Ryan, McConnell, and the other obstructionists who suddenly were against their own ideas because Obama tried to use those ideas. Single payer option for health care reform - Republican idea until Obama embraced it. The list is nearly endless. Republicans stand on the House and Senate floors every day and lie, they tell lies that are easily proven lies, but Republican voters don't care how much they lie, as long as they oppose Obama. How does this make sense for the future of the country? Please answer with something well thought out, not some nonsense about anyone is better than Obama, etc. Friggin back it up! And I mean with FACT not FOX Non-News regurgitation.

And Obama's rather successful war on terrorists? Obama haters can't even give him credit for that. Stupid, stupid, and even more than stupid.

I think you need a new can of nair, the one you are using must be running out. I see a little stuble on your bikini line.