Video: Mitt on O’Reilly, Fred on Hannity & Colmes

posted at 10:30 pm on September 6, 2007 by Bryan

Presidential campaigns are about weighing options, and for Republicans like myself, the options come down to who looks like they’ll be the strongest, wisest leader on the war, who will make this country stronger as we press on to defend our freedoms, who will our enemies fear and who will earn respect from our friends while best reflecting my conservative values? I don’t know the answers to much of that yet, but we had the opportunity to see two of the GOP’s front-runners on Fox tonight, not in a debate per se, but thanks to video editing we can make our own debate. Former Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney, whom Michelle interviewed a couple weeks back for Hot Air, appeared on The O’Reilly Factor, and former Tenn. Sen. Fred Thompson followed him on Hannity & Colmes. They comprise two of the top four GOP candidates. It’s not unreasonable to see them on a ticket together at some point, taking on Hillary Clinton or whoever emerges from the Dem pack.

Here they are, first Romney and then Thompson, one right after the other. I’ve edited both segments for time. Because of that, I limited both segments to two questions. Romney answers O’Reilly on immigration and the war in Iraq; Thompson answers Hannity on why he chose to launch his campaign on Leno, and the war in Iraq.

Since Romney aired first, his clip goes first.

Followed by Thompson.

Addendum: Toward the end of the first clip, O’Reilly questioned whether Romney had characterized Hillary Clinton’s position on Iraq accurately, when he said that her position is that we should depose Maliki and then leave. I did a little fact-checking, and while Clinton has never put the two ideas together the way Romney did for her, yes, they do accurately reflect her positions on Iraq.

Depose Maliki. And then leave Iraq.

Breathtaking, ain’t it? So much for Hillary Clinton being the smartest woman in the world.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

csdeven,

Don’t you realize that all those degrees that Mitt earned are just pieces of paper that his father bought for him, and that without his father’s intervention he would never have been hired anywhere?

Can’t you tell that he has no brains, no talent, no drive, no nothing and was just lucky to win life’s lottery?

Buy Danish on September 7, 2007 at 5:53 PM

Buy Danish on September 7, 2007 at 5:53 PM

Bwahahahahahaha!!!

Clearly Mitt’s family has some serious investments in software that will produce realistic yet fake diplomas etc.

csdeven on September 7, 2007 at 6:27 PM

ahkjr33 on September 7, 2007 at 4:59 PM

Well, you’re really waiting for Fred because Mitt has already said the laws of this country will be enforced. PERIOD.

csdeven on September 7, 2007 at 6:28 PM

csdeven on September 7, 2007 at 4:34 PM

In one instance documented by the SEC, a Lehman Brothers analyst admitted issuing a “1-Buy” rating for the stock of Bain Capital–owned DDi, when he believed that the shares were actually overpriced. Lehman Brothers’ investment bankers were handling DDi’s transactions, and, according to federal prosecutors, DDi and Bain Capital managers were “pushing hard” for the positive stock rating from Lehman’s research arm in exchange for the business.

Bain Capital — and Romney personally — made a profit on DDi, selling their shares in 2000. The stock crashed, and was virtually worthless by 2003. Early this year, Bain agreed to pay $4 million to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging that it had deceived the stock purchasers through its prospectus.

Regarding the olympics:

Others of the final tally of 53 corporate sponsors were already under Romney and Bain Capital’s influence. Marriott is led by close family friends — now campaign finance co-chairs; plus, Romney was sitting on the company’s board at the time. Sealy, which Bain Capital owned, became a sponsor. So did Monster.com, where one of Romney’s sons worked as a consultant.

Whoops, looks like his son did get a little something extra for being a Romney.
Eat crow? Do you like ketchup, or a little tabasco with that bird?

right2bright on September 7, 2007 at 9:05 PM

right2bright on September 7, 2007 at 9:05 PM

That’s excellent. Can you leave the actual links?

csdeven on September 7, 2007 at 10:00 PM

Fred only repeats whatever has already been said, about said issues. Only problem with that is, we don’t need a reader of scripts we need a writer of them.

Legions on September 7, 2007 at 10:08 PM

Fred said the border is his first priority to secure and build the fence

Second is Iran

Third is Iraq

Fourth is federal spending

EricPWJohnson on September 7, 2007 at 11:36 PM

csdeven on September 7, 2007 at 10:00 PM

http://thephoenix.com/article_ektid45262.aspx
http://thephoenix.com/Article.aspx?id=45260&page=1

I don’t remember which one, read them both and you will find out how good of a businessman Mitt is.

right2bright on September 7, 2007 at 11:47 PM

right2bright on September 7, 2007 at 9:05 PM

Romney got 53 corporate sponsors to help salvage the failing Olympics and one of them was Monster.com, where his son was a consultant.

The scandal here is what exactly??????????

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 1:27 AM

These are fundamental differences and pretending that requiring people to carry insurance, just as we do for cars or homes (even with subsidies for the poor) is Socialism is silly.

Buy Danish on September 7, 2007 at 3:07 PM

Each of the insurance types you’ve described above are very different. My understanding is that the requirement for auto-insurance is for liability only, in the event that you harm somebody else while driving. Housing insurance isn’t required if you own your home free and clear because the purpose is to secure the loan, not to dictate your personal priorities.

It’s a fact that all three types of insurance are very different. Requiring everybody to purchase health insurance for their own benefit is essentially the same thing as telling people that they can’t smoke or drink alcohol or eat unhealthy foods. It’s an unwarranted intrusion into our personal lives, pure and simple, and so therefore is un-American and certainly Socialist in nature in the eyes of many, especially conservatives.

Again, you claim that it is fair to require people to purchase personal health insurance because if they get hurt the taxpayers will have to foot the bill, but aren’t most people who are injured taxpayers? Also, to reiterate my point from last night, just because a taxpayer “might” utilize a government service at some point in their life does not allow the government to strip away their rights and unnecessarily intrude in their private affairs. How is this compatible with freedom and liberty?

FloatingRock on September 8, 2007 at 3:44 AM

Romney got 53 corporate sponsors to help salvage the failing Olympics and one of them was Monster.com, where his son was a consultant.

The scandal here is what exactly??????????

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 1:27 AM

In EricPWJohnsons mind.

BKennedy on September 8, 2007 at 4:34 AM

right2bright on September 7, 2007 at 11:47 PM

Well, that article lays out a lot of information but there wasn’t one single link that connected all the conspiracy theories. I didn’t see anything that appeared to be dishonest or a slick skirting of the rules. Business by nature is a dispassionate venture into making money.

Maybe you don’t prefer someone who is deeply involved in the business world, but I didn’t read anything that proves he is dishonest. Unlike Fred where we have information from the FEC that proves he converted his campaign contributions into a PAC and then paid his son a huge portion of those funds to do basically nothing. Meanwhile, little to nothing was done to further the cause the PAC was supposedly created to help.

That is the kind of proof I’d like to see. Do you have something that proves Mitt got his son the job at Monster.com? Was his son qualified for the position or was a qualified person fired to make room for a person that does nothing?

While interesting, your articles left me waiting for the smoking gun to tie all the innuendo together. It never came and appears to be very dishonest report on his part. But as always, I’m open to the facts and if some time in the future you can come up with some, please do not hesitate to link them.

Thanks

csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 6:08 AM

CS Deven

Those articles are a rebuttal to your argument pure and simple

EricPWJohnson on September 8, 2007 at 8:10 AM

CS Deven

Those articles are a rebuttal to your argument pure and simple

EricPWJohnson on September 8, 2007 at 8:10 AM

I know some Loose Change people whose articles are a rebuttal to your foolish ideas about 9/11.

After all, everything written on the internets is true. You might have been believed if you had kept your “I hate rich people” shtick under wraps.

BKennedy on September 8, 2007 at 8:34 AM

Those articles are a rebuttal to your argument pure and simple

EricPWJohnson on September 8, 2007 at 8:10 AM

Just what is your major malfunction? I never said they were not, but they did not have any links to evidence that ties together all the innuendo. Why should anyone accept it willy-nilly? I know you Fred groupies have no concern for facts, but don’t make the mistake of projecting your ignorance and blind devotion to image onto the rest of the group.

The example I am looking for is the type of proof we have concerning Fred’s funneling of campaign contributions to his son. I called the FEC and the gal there read it off, right down to the dates and amounts, how Fred manipulated the system. She even noted that Fred’s PAC did little to nothing for conservative causes.

So, I’m ready to consider proof along those lines. I welcome it because unlike you and your ilk, I want the best candidate possible and the only way to do that is to dig into the history of every rep candidate before the Clinton’s can do it during a general election.

csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 8:48 AM

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 1:27 AM

You guys throw up so much smoke it clouds your thinking.
I never said Mitt was invlolved in a scandal…where did I say that? Get your facts straight. Mitt is like “love potion #9″ to you guys.

csdeven was whining about Fred tossing his son a bone, and denying that Mitt helps his sons. I found where Mitt did help his son (no big deal for me, that’s what every dad would do), csdeven still won’t admit that a dad with influence helps his son.

These series of articles show how Bain works, leverage buyout, and with the buyout imposes large consulting fees. Many times enough to drive the company to bankruptcy, but Bain gets their millions. All good business (for Bain, not the companies they buy out) in the business world, you just can’t apply those tactics to government.

You draw whatever conclusions you want from them. Others will draw theirs.

He is not the great, wonderful, savior as a businessman as you are lead to believe…unless you want to ignore these articles.

The olympics were bailed out by him (with major business contributions), knowing that he was moving into politics. His business friends (almost exclusivly Mormon money) bailed out the Olympics, and now they are his main support staff and fund raisers. He is not raising money from the “masses”, but calling in his chits. What he owes to his major business friends, may be his shortfall.

But then again, stick your head in the sand, make accusations about what I did not say, and you will be a happy Mitt-wit.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 9:18 AM

That is the kind of proof I’d like to see. Do you have something that proves Mitt got his son the job at Monster.com? csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 6:08 AM
You miss understand my posting, read above.

I do not care to convince you, nothing will. Certainly common sense won’t. I would have to bring in Mitt sworn testimony (under a number of religous books) that he assisted his son in getting a job. The fact that Bain bought Monster, Mitt’s son began working at Monster while Bain was consulting with them should be enough for most people to understand. But I digress, I don’t care what you think, it is obvious nothing will change your mind.
This is just a rebuttle to your countless attacks on others while holding up Mitt as the saviour.

Mitt may be the chosen one, but he is not pure. His decisions as Pres. has to be tough, and he has shown that he is tough to make a buck. Hopefully he can transfer that from the business world to politics. It doesn’t always happen that way.

And your snide remard about me wanting businessman won’t go unnoticed.
You have no idea of my business background. But I do have an idea about yours…not understanding how business is done and the relationships that are created.
Being a good businessman is not the standard for being a good politian and vice-verse. They are just another skill set. I can point to many businessman that have failed at business, and succeeded at politics, and vice-verse.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 9:36 AM

csdeven

I brought up that several businessmen who were indicted for wrong doing during the period when Romney was running the Olympics

He was one of the FEW to NOT be indicted. This is a clintonian point.

Only Romney knows why his management led, bred soo much local and inter government corruption. From little contracts on snow removal in minor parking lots to scheduling busses and outhouses that olympics was a shambles and everyone was glad it was over the profit was from the outrageous television coverage of the scandals both internal and the spectacular judging and event scandals as well – I guess you could “credit” Romney with that.

Now Romneys name is being passed around in the Subprime mess first as an investor but was he really just an investor

http://www.thestreet.com/s/mitt-romney-hit-by-mortgage-meltdown/funds/followmoney/10374379.html

Sooo,

Parents give him job with firm – firms collaspes

Clients collaspe after his services

Olympics – worst in world history

Now the subprime mess starts and his name almost immediately surfaces as a major player

Mass – increased tax burden amost 15% during his tenure as a tax cutter?

Great, need this rich kid in there to do what he did for others to do to the rest of us

EricPWJohnson on September 8, 2007 at 10:00 AM

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 9:18 AM

Not2bright, you said:

Regarding the olympics:
Others of the final tally of 53 corporate sponsors were already under Romney and Bain Capital’s influence. Marriott is led by close family friends — now campaign finance co-chairs; plus, Romney was sitting on the company’s board at the time. Sealy, which Bain Capital owned, became a sponsor. So did Monster.com, where one of Romney’s sons worked as a consultant.
Whoops, looks like his son did get a little something extra for being a Romney.
Eat crow? Do you like ketchup, or a little tabasco with that bird?
right2bright on September 7, 2007 at 9:05 PM

Clearly you are implying that there is something nefarious there. I understand your argument with csdeven, but you are using a false analogy.

Mitt got 53 sponsors to SAVE the Olympics. His son happened to work at a consultant at one of them, monster.com. All that indicates is that it is possible because Mitt’s son worked there that Mitt may have had an easier route to get them to agree to a corporate sponsorship. It’s also possible that His son’s connection to monster.com could have had nothing to do with getting their sponsorship. Either way, it doesn’t matter because there is NOTHING wrong with it.

The fact that these corporations agreed to sponsor the olympics is a GOOD thing. The previous sponsors were pulling out because of the corruption scandals that preceded Mitt’s arrival.

Without those sponsorships the Olympics would not have had the cash flow necessary to operate. I would also remind you that Mitt donated a million dollars of his own money to the effort.

The bottom line is that I am looking for the truth. You can go through other threads and find me defending Guiliani and even, yes, Fred!

Oh, and could you please stop claiming that any of us have said that parents have no roles in their children’s futures? Just because you repeatedly claim we said something we never said doesn’t make it true.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 10:09 AM

Parents give him job with firm – firms collaspes
EricPWJohnson on September 8, 2007 at 10:00 AM

What the hell are you talking about?

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 10:15 AM

Housing insurance isn’t required if you own your home free and clear because the purpose is to secure the loan

It’s my understanding is that the requirement for auto-insurance is for liability only.

True, but it is a liability to others if you don’t have health insurance.

Housing insurance isn’t required if you own your home free and clear because the purpose is to secure the loan

True.

Requiring everybody to purchase health insurance for their own benefit is essentially the same thing as telling people that they can’t smoke or drink alcohol or eat unhealthy foods.

That’s a huge stretch, and in any case it’s not just “for their own benefit”, it’s also for the benefit of taxpayers.

Again, you claim that it is fair to require people to purchase personal health insurance because if they get hurt the taxpayers will have to foot the bill, but aren’t most people who are injured taxpayers?

Not necessarily, but it is a false analogy in any case. For example, government employees pay taxes but that does not mean they are entitled to exorbitant salaries and benefits at the taxpayers expense. (By the way, “Injured” does not cover developing a chronic or terminal disease. I used the car accident example the other day as a hypothetical to show how I would end up paying for your accident if you were not insured).

How is it not “Socialism” for me to pay for your hypothetical accident? This is not “intruding into your personal liberties” because, if we are to return to the car insurance comparison, if you don’t carry health insurance you are a liablility to the rest of us who have to foot the bill if something happens. Indeed, you are intruding more on MY personal liberties if I have to pay for you.

Moreover, the advantage to this system is that instead of increasing taxes like the nightmare of HillaryCare, or even under the current broken system, it ultimately reduces taxes, which is a “conservative value”.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 10:41 AM

Sorry – that was for FloatingRock!

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 10:42 AM

R2B,

I never denied anything. I simple responded to your implications that something execrable was afoot. I simple asked you for proof that there was a provable connection and all you came back with was the “use your common sense” answer. I cannot take what you are saying seriously because these same assertions were made about Mitt’s dad getting him his first job. But as you have seen, there is no connection as Mitt graduated on his own efforts and the guy that hired him was a top recruiter from Harvard.

I have no problem with fathers helping sons, but you have implied that Mitt did not earn his achievements, but that he was given these positions solely because of his father and not on his own merits.

If you are going to persist in these implications, I’d want to see the kind of proof we have for your preferred candidate, that clearly shows he manipulated the rules of the FEC and funneled huge mounts of cash to his son for a do nothing job.

I don’t believe you can point to a comment of mine that holds up Mitt ass the savior. As a matter of fact I am very skeptical of many of Mitt’s comments and policies. As of yet, I haven’t seen any real proof for what you imply as negatives. I have explained for several months that I want all candidates vetted equally, be damned the results. The loony Fred supporters do not have the same honorable standards. They want to elect some admiral from a movie and a DA from a TV show. They prognosticated all summer that 24 hours after Fred announced, the primaries would be all but over. They claimed he was getting all his ducks in a row and that he would hit the ground running. Here are the facts though……His staff started falling apart the day he announced. His interviews have been vague and lack luster. He says stupid crap, like OBL doesn’t count, but then has to come back and “explain” what he meant. He purposely skipped the debate and pissed off a huge portion of the electorate in the key early state of NH.

Since the Fred groupies have been so wrong about Fred, and I have been very, very, accurate about Fred, you just have to live with the fact that my credibility is light years ahead of the groupies. That means my comments are the ones that should be given serious consideration and not those of a bunch of swooning hair renting groupies.

csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 10:45 AM

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 10:09 AM

Now you guys are really showing your stupidity.

Read my posts, cs says Fred is an idiot for giving his son a job, I show where Mitt helps his son. Cs says prove it, I don’t have any court records or sworn statements.

OK? Read the articles and make up your own mind of what kind of businessmand Mitt is. Get it? I don’t care if you believe the article, I don’t care if you ignore the articles, I was only responding to CS dehial that Mitt would help his kids, or that powerful fathes help their kids. He can deny what he posted, read back it is in black and white. You guys are two much.

And I will say it again, I don’t care who gets nominated, Fred, Rudy, Huckabee, Mitt, McCain, I just won’t annoint whomever as the saviour of the Republican party. And I won’t ignore his faults.

Enough of you Mitt-wits, you can’t read an article(s) without getting your undies in a bunch. Or without calling the person who posts an article wirtten by someone else some name.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 11:14 AM

positions solely because of his father and not on his own merits.

Where did I post “solely”. You have gone back to your lies.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 11:15 AM

not2bright,

Jeez.

First, I can’t speak for csdeven, but I doubt that he called Fred an “idiot” for “giving his son a job” and as I have said twice now, NONE OF US HAVE DENIED THAT FATHER’S HELP THEIR CHILDREN so would you please stop claiming we said or implied that?

Mitt benefited from a great education but he earned his degrees and jobs on merit. That is not the same thing as nepotism.

Your example does not show that Mitt helped his son get a job (or “buy” him an job as you claimed earlier when you said how much you wish you could have gone on a mission).

If you have evidence that Mitt “bought” his son a job, or that he intervened to “get him a job” please provide it now, because I am really getting tired of your just making things up out of whole cloth.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 11:53 AM

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 11:14 AM

Well, I guess that means you’ll start telling both sides of the story now?

Ya know the one where you admit you have no proof Mitt was helped by his dad. The one where you admit that Mitt was offered his first job by a guy who was one of the top Harvard recruiters. The one where you admit that Mitt had the grades and potential to be recruited without the need from dad. The one where you admit that you have no proof that Mitt’s dad had any influence on where Mitt went on his mission.

You aren’t fooling anyone. You are taking the side of Mitt’s history that you feel is detrimental to his candidacy. Well, when you are as one sided and biased as you are, others will take up the opposite view. When you are confronted on it, you deny intimating anything negative. Well, we can all see that you are full of $hit. You’re afraid to have a stand up discussion about Mitt and admit both his good and bad points.

The difference between Mitt and Fred is that Mitt’s dad made him earn his keep and Fred funneled campaign cash to his son for doing basically nothing.

csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 12:17 PM

Not2Bright,

One more point -

This story clearly shows that Thompson’s kids careers soared because of their dad’s career, and the fact that they both became lobbyists can be construed as a conflict of interest.

Even if you could prove that Mitt intervened to get his son a job (which I bet a million mangoes you can’t do) it would be a completely different situation because Mitt was not a legislator and as such there is not conflict of interest.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 12:23 PM

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 11:53 AM

Yeah, your right, cs never denied George helped Mitt, that Mitt helped his sons…sure.

cs never attacked Fred for giving his son a job…sure

Mitt got all of his jobs on merit, never using his fathers influence to help, and Mitts son never used Mitt…sure

Bain bought Monster, Monster hired Mitts son, they never new who Mitts son was, guess mitts son was lucky…sure

Yeah, I have his transcripts of his court hearing where he swore on whatever book the Mormons use to admit that he brought a gun in to Monster and forced them to hire his son (that was when he was for gun control, but is now for it). I just don’t want to give you that transcript, instead you will have to use common sense…sure

Everything in that article(s) are lies and prove nothing, Mitt is a saint, perfect and pure, doesn’t get most of his money from the same sources that bailed out the Olympics, didn’t force compainies into bankruptcy after paying millions of dollars to Bain for their fine consulting…sure

And I was speaking to csdeven, not you, but go ahead and defend him for not speaking ill of Fred for hiring his son, that gives you a lot of credibility…sure

Now go find somethng useful to do the rest of the weekend. Like go door to door and hand out vote for Mitt tracts.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 12:28 PM

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 12:23 PM

When did I say Freds kids did not benefit from Fred? Certainly they did, all powerful men help their sons…get it?

God your dense, or when did I mention “conflict of interest”? You are creating an argument when there isn’t any.
Sheesh.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 12:31 PM

You aren’t fooling anyone. You are taking the side of Mitt’s history that you feel is detrimental to his candidacy. Well, when you are as one sided and biased as you are, others will take up the opposite view.
csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 12:17 PM

You mean like this?

Mitt did a good job with the olympics, and he was probably a decent businessman…
right2bright on September 7, 2007 at 12:59 AM

So now you think Mitt did a terrible job with the olympics, and he probably was a indecent businessman? You must, because I am forcing you to the dark side…sheeesh, you kids.

You should read and digest what people write…you are to caught up in “gotcha”. You don’t know how to handle someone that is looking at both sides, you only see “magic” in Mitt. He is just like anyone else, lots of baggage, lots of good, lots of wrong, lots of decisions means he made some right ones and some wrong ones…do the right outweight the wrong? I don’t know yet…but you do, or you have invested yourself to the point that you can’t change your mind.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 12:41 PM

not2bright,

Considering all your bloviating, I would have to waste an awful lot of time to find out exactly what you said or didn’t say.

I have pointed out specific and direct quotes that you have made and all you manage to do is pretend that they didn’t mean what they clearly did mean.

If you don’t think that going to Stanford, graduating first in your class at BYU, and then going on to get TWO graduate degrees from Harvard “merits” getting a job, then I don’t have a clue how YOU define “merit”.

As for Mitt’s son, I don’t know what his education and experience was so I cannot comment on that, but you have still not given us anything to show that he was hired because of Mitt. The only article you quoted from had to do with the Olympic sponsors.

You are assuming that because Bain Capital bought Monster.com that Mitt’s son got the consulting job. Where is the evidence? Next, what difference would it make if he had?

Time to get off the pot, and I mean that in more ways than one.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 12:42 PM

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 12:42 PM

Read the articles…read the articles there is more than Olympic sponsers…read the articles.

I already said that I have the court transcripts.

I can’t hold your hand, I can’t sit here and teach you to read and understand, and I certainly can’t expect you to know what cs and I wrote. He knows he dissed Fred on hiring his son, you must have missed that. He knows he said that he would like to see some example of Mitt helping his son get a job, I did. That’s all. I really don’t read much of what you post, it doesn’t make much sense. You are trying to interject yourself in something you don’t grasp. It is about cs denying that influential fathers help sons, and I…oh nevermind, you just want to babble and argue.

Mitt is great, he is fantastic, can do no wrong…that should keep you happy for a couple of hours.

So long, it has been…well interesting.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 12:55 PM

Not2bright,

You quoted ONE paragraph from the Boston Phoenix story that did NOT say that Mitt’s father got his son a job at Monster.com.

YOU used THAT paragraph to make your “point”. Since that paragraph showed NOTHING, YOU are obligated to quote a paragraph and provide a link that does prove your point.

Get off the pot, dude.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 1:04 PM

Mitt is a saint, perfect and pure,

That’s poppycock. Mitt has to answer for his stance on the 2nd amendment, taxes, and I certainly am discouraged by his lack of involvement in our military. He seems ignorant of it and even though it is not a deal breaker for me, I’d much rather he come over to my house on September 24th when my wife and I will be thinking of our youngest son on a plane headed for Iraq. I don’t think he has even a cursory understanding of what that feels like. I have emailed his staff to express my concern and that I do not want lip service. There is a club of sorts that all military families belong to and we cannot spell it out as it is completely based on our feelings.

but go ahead and defend him for not speaking ill of Fred for hiring his son, that gives you a lot of credibility…sure

He was defending truth, not me.

csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 1:10 PM

csdeven,

I did a search of both stories not2bright posted from the Boston Phoenix and only one of them mentions “Monster.com” and it is only in the one freaking sentence that has to do with the Olympics.

Indeed, I can’t even find anything which shows that Bain Capital bought Monster.com.

I also have no idea what “court papers” he is alluding to.

Do you know what his “sources” are? Perhaps I missed one of his brilliant posts and thus missed where he actually substantiated his claims with factual evidence?

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 1:15 PM

So long, it has been…well interesting.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 12:55 PM

I missed that not2bright has fled the scene! I guess we’ll never know what his sources are, unless of course csdeven can provide them.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 1:44 PM

Well you guys got me.

Mitt Romney, who did major consulting work for Monster, and who hired Romneys son’s would not release their personal records to me.

Looks like Jeff Taylor, the founder of Monster,com, a personal friend of Mitt’s. Accidently hired Bill, as a consultant (following in his fathers footsteps), and not knowing that Mitts son was probably even seeking a job.

Yeah, you little detectives got me on this one. No personal files. All I have is a personal friend of Mitt’s, who was the CEO and founder of Monster, didn’t know that Mitt’s son was requesting a consulting job with Monster.com. No reason for Mitt to mention that, naw, why would he or his son, ever mention Jeff was a personal friend of Mitt’s. Hell Mitt’s son had all of the background as a consultant, why he was a consultant with…
That seems to be missing from the personal file also, this was his first job as a consultant…huh, imagine the coincidence of that.
A personal friend, a job opening, a hiring of a rookie to one of the most prestigious business firms…boy talk about being lucky.

Yeah you guys are first class detectives…nothing gets by you.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 1:50 PM

not2bright,

Cut to the freaking chase.

YOU said that if I read the Boston Phoenix stories I would find proof that Mitt’s son was hired at Monster.com because of his intervention. I did read those stories and they say nothing of the sort.

Now you are adding a new falsehood, namely this one:

Mitt Romney, who did major consulting work for Monster…

Give me a source now, or admit that you are smoking crack. Indeed, judging from you incoherent writing, I have more evidence that that is true than anything you have come up with at this point, including your claim that Bain and Company bought Monster.com.

I want you to link to a source. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 2:02 PM

I want you to link to a source. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 2:02 PM

From a consulting abstract:
The authors–three senior Bain consultants–have spent the past ten years analyzing customer-loyalty initiatives, both successful and unsuccessful, at more than 200 companies in a wide range of industries.
When Monster.com rolled out a customer relationship management (CRM) program in 1998, it was sure it had a new money-making strategy on its hands. The Massachusetts-based job-listings company had invested over $1 million in customized software and integrated all its computer systems in an attempt to boost the efficiency of its sales force. These CRM applications had been specially developed to allow Monster.com’s sales representatives instant access to data for prospective customers. However, the new system proved to be frighteningly slow–so slow, in fact, that salespeople in the field found themselves unable to download customer information from the company’s databases onto their laptops. Every time they tried, their machines froze. Eventually, Monster.com was forced to rebuild the entire system. It lost millions of dollars along the way, not to mention the goodwill of both customers and employees.

Author Affiliations:
1Director, Bain & Company, Boston
2Director Emeritus, Bain & Company
3Vice President, Bain & Company
Rigby, Darrell K.1
Reichheld, Frederick F.2
Schefter, Phil3

Darrell K. Rigby is a director of Bain & Company in Boston and founder of the firm’s annual management tools survey. He is also the author of “Moving Upward in a Downturn” (HBR June 2001).

Frederick F. Reichheld is a director emeritus of Bain & Company and a Bain fellow. He is the author of The Loyalty Effect (Harvard Business School Press, 1996) and Loyalty Rules! (Harvard Business School Press, 2001).

Phil Schefter is a vice president of Bain & Company and the coauthor with Frederick Reichheld of “E-Loyalty: Your Secret Weapon on the Web” (HBR July–August 2000).

This abstract (not the abstract, but the complete report) was then sold in a consulting contract to Monster.com, which implemented the CRM programs successfully. Increasing its customer service, at the time Monser was having growth pains, and was having difficulty keeping up with the pace of their growth.

Later this abstract was revised and printed as a book. Which these three Harvard/Bain/Monster/ guys tried to make a buck.

Your welcome, it is difficult to keep you guys informed.

You guys are way over your head…for $1,000 (about 100th of the original cost) bucks I will sell you the complete contract.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 3:19 PM

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 1:15 PM

R2B has nothing so far. He wants us to use our common sense to indict Mitt and his dad. He says he has no court transcripts to prove it, but continues to attempt to dilute Mitt’s accomplishments by using vague references to the influence Mitt’s dad had in getting Mitt his jobs. He has not placed a percentage of influence. IE: He says dad helped Mitt and leaves it hanging as to how much. This vagueness suggests that Mitt needed LOTS of help. As if dad did not intervene, Mitt would never have gotten ANY job. In reality, if dad did help Mitt, it’s weight in the mind of the employer was more like 2% of his decision.

So, I’m still waiting and welcome any facts that he can produce.

csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 4:10 PM

Looks like Jeff Taylor, the founder of Monster,com, a personal friend of Mitt’s.
right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 1:50 PM

I’ll need a link for this too. I did a google search with both names and came up with no links between the two. I guess I just need to be led by the hand.

csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 4:20 PM

I did find one link. Monster.com was the first Dot Com to sponsor the Olympics. But still no personal links to Mitt.

csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 4:23 PM

I can’t find anything that says any of Mitt’s sons works for Monster.com. Again, it’s looks like I’m gonna need some kind of link.

csdeven on September 8, 2007 at 4:30 PM

Please excuse me for having not read the last several dozen posts in this thread. It appears they were all made by three posters; and I make no distinctions among them. He who argues with an idiot is an idiot.

In the extremely unlikely event that anyone else is still reading this, goodby. And to Bryan and Allah, congratulations on your tiny little contribution to the amount of Spam on the Internet.

logis on September 8, 2007 at 4:57 PM

You guys are way over your head…for $1,000 (about 100th of the original cost) bucks I will sell you the complete contract.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 3:19 PM

not2bright,

Kerist, you’re a Grade A jacka$$.

This is hilarious. You want to charge me $1000 to buy this, which is not an “abstract”, but a 2002 article for Harvard Business Review – which I could get for $6.50? This isn’t even about Monster.com specifically, but about CRMs in general.

(Be patient, the link takes a moment to open).

What does this have to do with Mitt Romney or his son? A whole lot of nothing?

csdeven,

Even if one were to stipulate that Mitt and Jeff Taylor are friends, this is a totally meaningless exercise. Not2bright is desperately trying to back up his claims but he has nothing to show for them.

I just hope this smoke cracking fool never serves on a jury since he is incapable of evaluating facts and information. He is dealing exclusively in rumor and innuendo (much of which seems to be entirely of his own invention).

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 5:01 PM

He who argues with an idiot is an idiot.
logis on September 8, 2007 at 4:57 PM

Well logis, you argued with me earlier, so I guess that makes you an idiot too.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 5:01 PM

Do you know what an abstract is?
Not the 6.50 Harvard business extract.

But what where the abstract is…oh nevermind, you have to know what an abstract is.

You guys asked for this:

I’ll need a link for this too. I did a google search with both names and came up with no links between the two. I guess I just need to be led by the hand.

Bain and Monster.com

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 5:27 PM

Do you know what an abstract is?
Not the 6.50 Harvard business extract.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 5:27 PM

Are you a pathological liar?

An abstractis a summary of a larger analytical/research report. I linked to a Harvard Business Review article.

Do you know what an article is?

More important, where is your evidence that Bain bought Monster?

Time to put up or shut up.

Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 6:49 PM

Not a problem admitting a mistake (you should try it, oh that’s right you don’t make mistakes), I did misstate about the purchase, they did consulting for Monster.com, then Monster hired Mitts son. Monster approached them regarding customer service problems.

right2bright on September 8, 2007 at 10:21 PM

I’m still waiting for a link showing that Monster hired Mitt’s son.

csdeven on September 9, 2007 at 12:01 AM

The more we find out about Fred, the more he appears to be as vacuous as we have suspected.

csdeven on September 9, 2007 at 8:09 AM

right2bright,

We’re making progress!

This is all meaningless and irrelevant minutiae, but I want to make a point about the difference between facts and innuendo.

This was your entire premise which by your own admission is now wrong:

The fact that Bain bought Monster, Mitt’s son began working at Monster while Bain was consulting with them should be enough for most people to understand.

.

Now you need two more things to prove your “thesis”.

1. Show us how Mitt personally did consulting for Monster.com. He left Bain and Company in 1998, and Mitt’s name is not on that article. He had been called back from Bain Capital to Bain and Company to turn it’s declining fortunes around (which he did brilliantly) and it is highly unlikely that he was doing consulting work himself at that point.

2. Show us that Mitt’s son was not qualified to work as a consultant and could not have been hired if not for Mitt’s “buying” him the job (which is what you accused Mitt’s parents of doing for him, and which is the genesis of this entire argument).

In order to do that you’ll have to begin by identifying which one of Romney’s sons did this work, since the Boston Phoenix article does not name him, and there is no “Bill” Romney as you wrote earlier.

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 9:42 AM

csdeven,

The Boston Phoenix article says that Mitt’s son worked as a consultant for Monster.com at the time they agreed to be an Olympic sponsor under Mitt’s management, but even they don’t pretend that there is anything nefarious about that.

Open the link above…

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 9:58 AM

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 9:58 AM

Yeah. I did a google for all Mitt’s sons and Monster.com. I found no direct link naming any of his sons and Monster. I am sure R2B has the proof by it just being stubborn about sharing it. I don’t accept one article mentioning it as proof that he did.

But, as you pointed out, there was nothing underhanded about it anyway. I would like to know if the son in question was qualified because I believe that is relevant.

csdeven on September 9, 2007 at 10:31 AM

Right2bright,

Regarding the Big Dig, which you say Romney mishandled, note the following which ironically I found at an anti-Romney website:

In November 2004, Romney asked Amorello to resign. (source: Worcester T&G, 11/13/2004)

In January 2005, Romney asked Amorello to resign. (source: Boston Globe, 1/26/2005)

In March 2005, Romney asked Amorello to resign. (source: Boston Globe, 3/16/2005)

Indeed, this story appeared in the Boston Globe on July 8, 2006:

Romney fights for control of turnpike board
Expected to veto plan to extend Levy’s term

By Sean P. Murphy and Andrea Estes, Globe Staff | July 8, 2006

Escalating the power struggle over the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, Governor Mitt Romney plans to veto today a portion of the state budget passed by the Legislature that would weaken his control over the board that runs the controversial agency, the governor’s office said yesterday.

For several years, Romney has called for the resignation of Turnpike Authority chairman Matthew J. Amorello over management of the $14.6 billion Big Dig.

Amorello, a former state senator with strong ties to legislative leaders, has steadfastly refused to give up his $223,000-a-year post. Nevertheless, Romney was expected to effectively take control of the board this month when he filled a vacancy on the board, Romney’s third appointment on the five-member board since taking office in 2003.

But in May the state Senate slipped an amendment into the budget that would deny Romney his third appointment by extending the term of the incumbent board member, Jordan Levy, who is an ally of Amorello.

The veto planned today would reject the budget amendment that would extend Levy’s term.

Three days later, on July 11, 2006, Milena Delvalle was killed by the ceiling collapse, and the Democrat controlled legislature finally gave Romney the control he had sought for years.

Here’s the link to the July 8 story, but you may need to register at Boston.com to access the full article.

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 11:20 AM

More on the Big Dig. This link does not require registration…

November 12, 2004 – After revelations of thousands of leaks which go back to 2001, Romney renews his demand that Amorello resign.

Amorello responds:

“I told (Romney) that I will not step down and there is no justifiable reason for me to do so,” Amorello said. “First off, let me start by saying that when the Big Dig’s tunnel system opened in 2003, it was perfectly safe. It remains so today.”

AND

“It is disheartening when public officials take and opportunity to frighten the public. There is no issue here with the public driving on this roadway,” said Amorello.

Note:

The Turnpike Authority is an independent agency, and Romney cannot fire Amorello, whose contract runs through 2007.

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 11:55 AM

Parents give him job with firm – firms collaspes
EricPWJohnson on September 8, 2007 at 10:00AM

Soooooooo…. this is where EricPWJohnson has been floating around… I thought he was on vacation since he wasn’t commenting on the other Fred posts the last few days…

Turns out he cannot take the heat when the tide turns against Fred…

And Danish’s response to EricPWJohnson here demonstrates..

What the hell are you talking about?
Buy Danish on September 8, 2007 at 10:15 AM

exactly….. why I have yet to see a post where he makes sense… or is even remotely funny..

The fact that he hasn’t showed up to defend Fred in the other posts where the tide is against Fred, just shows you what EricPWJohnson’s comments really are…… a pile of post-digested chicken feed… good enough for rose fertilizer….that’s all.

Watch him not even responding to me…. he is so chicken.

Mcguyver on September 9, 2007 at 12:11 PM

Mcguyver,

You are an idiot to pay any attention to this thread!

/sarc.

According to Logis’ “logic” ( see logis on September 8, 2007 at 4:57 PM), we are just supposed to let people like right2bright and EricPWJohnson make false statements about Romney and not respond.

The fact that Logis doesn’t like Romney has nothing to do with it of course :)

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 1:11 PM

The fact that Logis doesn’t like Romney has nothing to do with it of course :)
Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 1:11 PM

You are giving your favorite troll a run for his/her money as well I see.

Cheers.

Mcguyver on September 9, 2007 at 1:22 PM

Mcguyver on September 9, 2007 at 1:22 PM

I don’t know that Logis is my favorite troll! There are quite a few of them who might be eligible for that title.

I am quite new to the “Hot Air Community” and am only just getting to know who all the characters are

Dittoes on the cheers!

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 1:31 PM

Dittoes on the cheers!

Funny thing is… I remember the really stupid ones, ie: EricPWJohnson, and the really smart ones –too numerous to mention– in that order.

I guess every village needs an idiot or two (or more).

HotAir has more than it’s share.

Mcguyver on September 9, 2007 at 1:43 PM

Mcguyver on September 9, 2007 at 1:43 PM

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 2:19 PM

Huh? I don’t know what happened there. I guess I should have used the preview button.

Mcguyver on September 9, 2007 at 1:43 PM

The stupid ones do have a tendency to stand out. I could ignore them but I kinda consider it my civic duty to debunk them.

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 2:22 PM

The stupid ones do have a tendency to stand out. I could ignore them but I kinda consider it my civic duty to debunk them.

Nobody gets a pass….Nobody!!

Keep up the heat, until it burns through their thick skulls….once they disappear you know you’ve done the first step….caused them to think.

Mcguyver on September 9, 2007 at 2:40 PM

It’s taken me 2 days to break through at all with “right2bright”. It is a very tedious process!

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 3:16 PM

It’s taken me 2 days to break through at all with “right2bright”. It is a very tedious process!

I know the feeling… I really do.

Check out my fourteen (14) hour marathon from:

Mcguyver on September 3, 2007 at 1:52 PM
to:
Mcguyver on September 4, 2007 at 3:51 AM

here
with: doriangrey, Bradky, and lorien1973.

It’s one for the history books… and very exhausting to say the least.
But notice how… not one of them, not a one… had any response once their reasoning/intellect was fully debunked!

And just to show you how chicken they are, watch them not even responding me here, today even though, I know they are around.

Mcguyver on September 9, 2007 at 3:32 PM

Show us how Mitt personally did consulting for Monster.com. He left Bain and Company in 1998, and Mitt’s name is not on that article. He had been called back from Bain Capital to Bain and Company to turn it’s declining fortunes around (which he did brilliantly) and it is highly unlikely that he was doing consulting work himself at that point.

2. Show us that Mitt’s son was not qualified to work as a consultant and could not have been hired if not for Mitt’s “buying” him the job (which is what you accused Mitt’s parents of doing for him, and which is the genesis of this entire argument).

In order to do that you’ll have to begin by identifying which one of Romney’s sons did this work, since the Boston Phoenix article does not name him, and there is no “Bill” Romney as you wrote earlier.

Buy Danish on September 9, 2007 at 9:42 AM

Others of the final tally of 53 corporate sponsors were already under Romney and Bain Capital’s influence. Marriott is led by close family friends — now campaign finance co-chairs; plus, Romney was sitting on the company’s board at the time. Sealy, which Bain Capital owned, became a sponsor. So did Monster.com, where one of Romney’s sons worked as a consultant

Mitt’s company, Bain did consulting for Monster. More important is still how this got started.

You all claimed that Fred’s son was paid as a consultant, I stated that Mitt’s son also was paid as a consultant. Paid by a personal friend. And that turned out to be true.

You guys are the ones hanging on to the original belief, although you have revised your position and I am aware of that, that fathers help son’s. Mitt was helped by his father. Powerful men in influential positions give their sons an advantage. You don’t think so, I do. End of conversation.
I believe that, you guys don’t (or you didn’t until you realized that you were wrong and csdeven backed away).
Show me where I said he was buying his position? You guys thow out so many mis truths I can’t keep up.

Answer this one:

Where did I say he “bought” the job. Personal friend yes, but where did I say bought.

That’s all. Bain did consulting for Monster, the COO (or CEO) a personal friend of Mitt’s.

Much of Mitt’s money is coming from the Olympic business relationships that bailed out the Olympics. What does he owe them? I don’t know, but we will find out as time goes on and campaign money is recorded.

At least I have the common sense to admit to one mistake of Monster being bought by Bain, it was a contract with Bain for consulting (the abstract I presented), and no Bain does not make money selling their consulting for $6.50 on the Harvard business school service.

In case you don’t know, Bain makes money consulting not writing abstracts. If you understood what an abstract was you would not have mentioned the $6.50…how embarrassing for you.

And no, I have another life, I have not read much of what you guys wrote, but I can imagine that if I admitted one error, you are assuming everything is in error. What most of the liberals do, right out of their playbook. Congratulations.

On March 15, 2005, the governor directed the Executive Office of Transportation and the Massachusetts Highway Department to conduct an examination of the tunnel elements of the CA/T Project open to traffic. This examination is ongoing.”

That assertion was also included in August and September 2005 bond statements, as well as statements dated February 28, 2006 and April 18, 2006, an I-Team review shows.

“It was a mistake,”…
Misinformation in bond offerings is considered a serious breach of trust to potential investors and could result in a U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission investigation. Potential investors in state bonds rely on the information provided on bond statement to assess the state’s financial condition.

OOPs, guess his law degree didn’t help here. But at least he protected some investors He would never want his rich friends to get hurt.

right2bright on September 10, 2007 at 12:01 PM

Nonetheless, Romney defended the ongoing involvement of Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff in the completion of the $14.6 billion Big Dig project, even though he lambasted the firm in the aftermath of the accident.

Mitt Romney appoints a new Mass Pike Authority board member due to a mistake in his prior appointment (political balance of the board). This new member is a friend of Romney’s rather than someone with road/highway experience. How? The person chosen is Judy Pagliuca, her husband is the managing director of Bain Capital, the company Romney founded.

Stephen Bechtel (President of Bechtel), longtime friend and supporter of Romney, has never been mentioned once by Romney, except when Romney finally placed an investigator in to look at Bechtels wrongs in the big dig…oh did I mention the investigator worked for Bechtel?

And of course they kept Bechtel as the engineering firm.

For Salt Lake City, Bechtel provided a detailed overall budget and helped plan schedules and manage costs. In addition, the company performed management services for design and construction of venues, with a focus on security issues.

Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

right2bright on September 10, 2007 at 12:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3