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
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJosh Marshall: A Losing Battle
A Losing Battle
Josh Marshall
Running my own little company and him being a bona-fide high-flyer, I never imagined Id be in a position to teach Mitt Romney a basic lesson about corporate governance and running a business. But here goes: The CEO is in charge and hes responsible for what happens in the company.
This is not only morally true; its legally true. If Bain had committed bad acts during the period in question, Romney would undoubtedly be on the hook for it, regardless of whether hed done the bad acts personally or even known about the bad acts. Whether you were paying attention or not would be and is irrelevant. And just as irrelevant if youd delegated your responsibilities to someone else. Just doesnt matter. Youre CEO, youre responsible. End of story.
(Its a separate and interesting question why an acting CEO was never appointed if Romney was off in another state for years working full-time doing something else.)
To say that you were CEO, owner, Chairman of the Board and all the rest and yet had no responsibility for anything that happened just amounts to elaborate buck-passing. And thats why this is a losing battle for Romney. Every technical argument about delegation, lack of knowledge and everything else just drives home the point.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/07/a_losing_battle.php
Josh Marshall
Running my own little company and him being a bona-fide high-flyer, I never imagined Id be in a position to teach Mitt Romney a basic lesson about corporate governance and running a business. But here goes: The CEO is in charge and hes responsible for what happens in the company.
This is not only morally true; its legally true. If Bain had committed bad acts during the period in question, Romney would undoubtedly be on the hook for it, regardless of whether hed done the bad acts personally or even known about the bad acts. Whether you were paying attention or not would be and is irrelevant. And just as irrelevant if youd delegated your responsibilities to someone else. Just doesnt matter. Youre CEO, youre responsible. End of story.
(Its a separate and interesting question why an acting CEO was never appointed if Romney was off in another state for years working full-time doing something else.)
To say that you were CEO, owner, Chairman of the Board and all the rest and yet had no responsibility for anything that happened just amounts to elaborate buck-passing. And thats why this is a losing battle for Romney. Every technical argument about delegation, lack of knowledge and everything else just drives home the point.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2012/07/a_losing_battle.php
Romney Testified He Maintained Business Ties During Olympics
Benjy Sarlin
Mitt Romney testified to Massachusetts officials in 2002 that he maintained business ties during his Olympics work, undermining his argument that he had no connection to Bain Capital or related companies after 1999. Notably, his campaign has refused to deny whether or not he ever held meetings with Bain during his time in Salt Lake City.
Romney, who at the time was trying to convince the state Ballot Law Commission that he should be allowed to run for office in Massachusetts despite living in Utah the last three years, did not directly address his work with Bain Capital. But, in testimony obtained by the Huffington Post, Romney said that he returned home for a number of social trips and business trips that brought me back to Massachusetts, board meetings, Thanksgiving and so forth.
Romney noted that he remained an active member of the board at Staples, where Bain was an early investor and a company Romney frequently cites on the trail, and LifeLike, a toy company where Bain was heavily invested at the time.
A spokesman for the Romney campaign declined to answer questions from Politico regarding whether Romney attended any meetings in person or phone with Bain during his Olympic leave, saying only that he had no active role.
- more -
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/romney-testified-he-maintained-business-ties-during-olympics.php
Benjy Sarlin
Mitt Romney testified to Massachusetts officials in 2002 that he maintained business ties during his Olympics work, undermining his argument that he had no connection to Bain Capital or related companies after 1999. Notably, his campaign has refused to deny whether or not he ever held meetings with Bain during his time in Salt Lake City.
Romney, who at the time was trying to convince the state Ballot Law Commission that he should be allowed to run for office in Massachusetts despite living in Utah the last three years, did not directly address his work with Bain Capital. But, in testimony obtained by the Huffington Post, Romney said that he returned home for a number of social trips and business trips that brought me back to Massachusetts, board meetings, Thanksgiving and so forth.
Romney noted that he remained an active member of the board at Staples, where Bain was an early investor and a company Romney frequently cites on the trail, and LifeLike, a toy company where Bain was heavily invested at the time.
A spokesman for the Romney campaign declined to answer questions from Politico regarding whether Romney attended any meetings in person or phone with Bain during his Olympic leave, saying only that he had no active role.
- more -
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/romney-testified-he-maintained-business-ties-during-olympics.php
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1015 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (4)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Josh Marshall: A Losing Battle (Original Post)
ProSense
Jul 2012
OP
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)1. What's the big deal? Romney has been pretty up-front about all this.
Mitt is just doing what 25% of American CEOs believe is required to be successful--decieve, cheat, and skate the margins of the rules.
He's been perfectly clear that his strength is his success as a business leader.
It's well known and accepted practice; the people who actually run this country know it.
That's why Congress and the DOJ won't go after the Banksters.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)2. Mitt math:
1977 + 25 = 1999
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)3. He got rich on his math...maybe he's right and libruls are wrang
Aerows
(39,961 posts)4. Mitt also never learned
The most important rule in politics and business: "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."