Found by Harold E. @ http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/07/obamas-hypocrisy-took-money-from-bain/
Barack Obama and his campaign have been making Mitt Romney’s time at Bain Capital one of their premiere mantras that have over and over backfired in their faces. They decided to attack the fact that Bain outsourced jobs during the restructuring of the companies they acquired. So what does Obama have to do with it? During the time he points to, 1999-2002, the executives of Bain donated to Obama for his campaign. No doubt at that time Barack Obama was not at all upset about jobs being outsourced as he got some big, fat checks from the executives.
Ben Shapiro points out, the same SEC form from February 2001 that lists Mitt Romney as “sole shareholder, sole director, Chief Executive Officer and President of Bain Capital … the controlling person of Bain Capital” also lists over a dozen other managing directors of Bain Capital, Inc. — all of whom were undoubtedly more active than Romney was during this period. And President Obama took money from many of them.
Take Joshua Bekenstein. Bekenstein has been a managing director of Bain Capital since 1986. In 2008, he signed Barack Obama a $4,600 check. In 2004, he gave a $50,000 donation to the Democratic National Committee. That’s outsourcing money, plain and simple. And Obama was happy to take it.
Or how about Stephen Pagliuca? Last year, he cut a $35,800 check to Barack Obama’s Victory Fund. Then he cut another $30,800 check to the DNC. And another $30,800 check to the DCCC. Jonathan Lavine and Mark Nunnelly have both maxed out to Obama already, as well as to the DNC. Lavin was a bundler for Obama, and raised over $100,000 for him. Michael Krupka gave Obama $4,600 in 2008.
Now there is nothing wrong with outsourcing jobs. There is nothing wrong with taking campaign contributions from businesses. The problem comes when one wants to bash his opponent over being in a company that did something you claim is bad and then took money from the very same people. In this case Barack Obama was fine with outsourcing while getting a check, but not fine when it becomes a political advantage.
That these corporate “persons” play both sides of the street … this is news to you?
It might be “news” to some people that Democrats, and Obama in particular, are involved up to their eyeballs or that there are Democrats in corporate America. That Democrats are sleazy liars and can’t be trusted might be news to some, yes.
Americans are tired of this crap. Americans are hurting. America wants honest discussion and solutions to turn the economy around.
You want companies to bring work back to America? Get government the hell out of the way. Quit creating complicated tax and regulatory hurdles that make doing business in America NOT WORTH IT!
Buildings and logos do not pay the salaries, taxes, rents dividends, insurances, etc. that represents business…PEOPLE DO!
Get over it lady, Businesses are people; people at work making a living and offering products and services of value for your dollar and your life.
I’m curious, is it common for politicians, of any political stripe or ideology, to refuse donations from anyone? It seems to me that they take money from whoever is willing to give it, no questions asked. I’m not sure Obama receiving donations from Bain tells us much of anything, other than politicians like money, and when they are running a huge campaign, will take it from anyone who offers. He clearly didn’t have any influence in the company’s decisions, nor does he seem to have repaid Bain with any kind of preferential treatment.
Come on Chris, accepting donations isn’t the issue and you know better. The post is about the hypocrisy of your candidate lecturing, no attacking Romney on the evils of outsourcing, while conveniently omitting his(Obama)role in profiting from the very same source. Your spin using the the commonality of both parties accepting money from anywhere is not going anywhere, so why even post that tripe!
Harold, in dismissing my argument, you seem to have forgotten to make one of your own. You say that donations aren’t the issue, but that seems to be the only issue here, unless Obama had some other connection to Bain that I’m not aware of.
I don’t see why it’s “spin” or “tripe” for me to ask whether politicians are known to refuse money from organizations or people they disagree with. Sure, it would have been principled for Obama to reject the money if he had problems with Bain’s business practices. But that’s a level of principle that I’m not sure any political candidates really live up to.
Harold is exactly right about the hypocrisy, and I would add utter cheek, that Obama displays in criticizing Romney on Bain and outsourcing jobs. His criticisms stretch the truth beyond recognition. His general criticism of business, while taking large chunks of money from business leaders, is disingenuous for a man that has been promoted all his life. But specifically to outsourcing he has no ground to stand upon. Some of the stimulus money he spent went to foreign jobs under the guise of creating American jobs:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-administration-outsourced-jobs-stimulus-funding
This goes along with the Obama theme of spreading the wealth…to other countries. Obama does not say he wants to bring America to her knees in order to lift people in other countries but everything he has done has had that effect.
Question! In recent statements Obama intimated that the source of all wealth and progress is government. Is he saying that government is a person? (She asked with flaming sarcasm)
This argument holds no water. Politicians take political donations from anywhere they can get it as long as it is legal (though for some, that’s not even an issue.) I’m willing to bet that if you researched all of the political donors for these two candidates that you might even find some murderers, rapists, and thieves mixed in. That doesn’t make these two candidates responsible for those actions.
The argument here is about the morality and responsibility for profiting from and overseeing a company that has been a part of America’s downfall. If you think it is the poor in this country who are responsible for our dire straits, you’re wrong. Companies like Bain have been moving American jobs overseas, not to save companies, but to inflate their already insane profits. I get it. That’s the goal of capitalism, but it’s not making our country stronger. Having a growing, yet minute, wealthy class and massive multi-national corporations with a massively expanding impoverished community destroys our country.
The problem with Mitt and Bain is not that he did something illegal. He did something morally wrong at least in regards to the health of our country. If his company had done something illegal, Mitt would have been legally liable. He could have gone to jail. So then, why is Mitt not morally responsible? His names were on the papers. He was the CEO and sole share holder. What gives?
Obama accepting political donations does not equate. Quit reaching. It’s not hypocrisy, it’s fair grounds.
Wade: “Companies like Bain have been moving American jobs overseas, not to save companies, but to inflate their already insane profits. I get it.”
Sadly, Wade you don’t get it. Most of the companies Bain helped have manufacturing shops or stores in America and they are employing American citizens:
And guess who “profits” the most from the investments that Bain makes? How about educators, charities, and retireees? Yes that is right. The biggest shareholder in bain is pension funds…even Calpers (Aug 2008)!
http://www.privateequityonline.com/Article.aspx?article=14618&hashID=3AC90C75B75AE216142DCA79F8A03539E91B8697
This subject is a sad, ridiculous ploy: manufactured outrage to cover for Obama who has the worst record of fiscal policy in the history of the country.