One of the more puzzling aspects of BainGate has been the role played by Glenn Kessler, the self-styled “fact checker” at the Washington Post. Kessler has been among Romney’s most stalwart defenders with respect to the date he supposedly left Bain Capital. According to Kessler, pretty much everything the Obama campaign has said about Romney has been false or grossly unfair, because, gosh darn it, Romney left in February 1999, full stop.
As we know, the Globe’s bombshell story earlier this week resulted in most of the world no longer believing that line, which appears to have been fairly recently invented by the Romney campaign. Importantly, among other things, it does not square with what Romney was saying at the time to the Boston press corps. Of special interest is a 1999 Herald story, recently unearthed by the Globe, HuffPo, and others, which reported that “Romney said he will stay on as a part-timer with Bain, providing input on investment and key personnel decisions. But he will leave running day-to-day operations to Bain’s executive committee.” And there’s more where that came from.
Anyway, Kessler seems very put out that people are questioning his judgment. His column in the immediate wake of the Globe story is exceptionally pouty, and uses a metaphor that says more about the situation than he likely intended.
We have looked at this issue before, back in January, and thought we had settled it.
But now the Boston Globe has raised the issue again….
We’re considering whether to once again take a deeper look at this, though it really feels like Groundhog Day again.
Ah, Groundhog Day – the classic Bill Murray movie in which February 2 repeats over and over again. But the whole point of the Groundhog Day movie is that February 2 repeats and repeats until Bill Murray stops screwing up. When he finally put things right, time moved on, and so did his life.
Perhaps there’s a lesson there for Mr. Kessler.
smalltownguy says
There’s another aspect of this that continues to puzzle me. As a major player in the leveraged buy-out field, Bain has been painted as a highly focused, energetic, and especially decisive firm. Move quickly, act forcefully. Dot the i’s cross the t’s. Yet it took them almost three years to settle with Romney? And during that time he continued to be the legal head of the firm? This just doesn’t make a lot of sense.
kbusch says
J. Bradford DeLong:
John Tehan says
…is Romney’s rationale for wanting the “I left Bain in 1999” claim to be believed. After 1999, Bain participated in some deals that caused otherwise viable firms to go under, with resulting job losses, pension losses, etc – as well, Bain participated in outsourcing US jobs. So that’s the reason Romney wants us all to believe that he left in 1999, correct? Yet, to this day, he continues to earn money from Bain – simply put, he has earned, and continues to earn, a princely sum from these dirty deals. Whether the company was under his direct control or not, he has made a fortune by what the company has done, no?
seascraper says
Any American with a retirement or education fund has invested in companies that have outsourced and cut costs. In fact we demand it.
Mr. Lynne says
… Romney should have done. Now he’s getting screwed in the cover-up instead.
danfromwaltham says
Absolutely nothing.
Mr. Lynne says
n/t
centralmassdad says
There is a significant element of truth the the notion that over the long term, the economy is best served by competitive businesses producing their products for lower costs. But this would require an answer to the question: but what about the people who are hurt by the economic friction resulting from an outsourcing move. Romney has neither the courage to defend the practice to the left, nor to explain to the right that government safety nets make the long term economic improvement possible.
kbusch says
Ed Gillespie, of the Romney campaign, tells us Romney retired retroactively. Perhaps Romney invited Senator Brown into his time machine so that he could talk to some Kings and Queens…
whosmindingdemint says
did his duty and hosted the poo-pooing of the Globe story by allowing that fossil and WaPo wunderchild Woodward to assure us all that Kessler did a tremendous amount of digging and got the story right. Grover Nordquist was also on hand to lend his unearned 2 cents (did you vote for him? I didn’t vote for him.) Oh, and Jon Kyl was in from the territories serving up rattlesnake stew to the beltway 4th-estaters with vapid predictions of republican victory in the senate and WH.
SSDD
smalltownguy says
Mark Kleiman at samefacts:
Mitt Romney now says he was spending full time running the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics when Bain Capital was doing all that nasty stuff after 1999, and that his title as Chief Executive Officer, as reported on numerous SEC filings, didn’t reflect any actual activity. Strangely, he’s gotten Glenn Kessler of the Washington Post to believe him. (This puts to one side the question whether, as sole shareholder in the enterprise that made his huge fortune, Romney had moral responsibility for the actions of the people he left in charge: you know, the way a President is responsible for the actions of his subordinates.)
Turns out there’s a fair way to resolve this question. Form 1040 has a line, right across from the signature line, for “Your Occupation.” Presumably through 1999 Romney would have listed his Bain Capital affiliation, and after 2002 he would have listed being Governor of Massachusetts. What went on that line for 2000, 2001, and 2002?
So if Mr. Romney will simply release his tax returns for those years, we can resolve the question and start arguing about something else. Fair enough?
lynne says
is just turning totally bizarre.
There is only two answers to why he drags this (and the tax return secrecy) on so much…one is that he believes that sticking his ground now that he’s committed to saying NO is more presidential than transparency, even harmless transparency…somehow I doubt this, but it’s possible. The other is that he has a deep, disgusting, awful financial past to hide which he thinks will turn the entire electorate against him.
Honestly, not sure which is worse. The former smacks so much of W and his OMG WMDs in Iraq malarkey…and we all know how the Bush years ended…
Mr. Lynne says
… either both of disclosure and transparency are either or neither ‘more presidential’, but what must be apparent is that they think blockading on his tax returns is more advantageous than releasing them. He gave McCain 23 years of returns, I guess we deserve less.
tblade says
Just as Romney’s title of Cheif Executive Officer of Bain post-1999 doesn’t reflect any actual activity and involvement in day-to-day managerial operations, neither does Romney’s title of Governor of Massachusetts indicate any significant activity in governance of our fair Commonwealth.
I would also submit that the record suggests that Mitt Romney “retired retroactively” from his job as governor, too.
danfromwaltham says
when Democrat Clinton signed int law, and Ted Kennedy and John Kerry voted for NAFTA?
I spoke to Congressman Frank back 2010 and asked if he believed Obama kept his word when he promised to relook at these free trade agreements signed in the 90’s. Barney said no!!!!!!!
Now all of a sudden, the Dems of 2012 are sounding like Pat Buchanan, wanting economic patriotism by putting American jobs first and railing against outsourcing. I can’t stand serial hypocrites and Obama and Company reak of it. Yet, seems like most of you follow the Pied Piper whenever your leaders play a different tune. When the chips were down, where were you all? Clapping like a trained seal at their conventions?
The USA is littered with closed factories due to the outsourcing caused by these free trade agreements and only now are you so concerned. You want this unenrolled voter to believe that? Give me a break and stop ripping off Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot, the true defender of the blue collar working class.
But the show must go on and the clowns in the Democratic Party must pretend to care for the working stiffs, even though after three years of the White House two years controlling all branches of government, nothing was done to amend NAFTA or GATT. So when you go to NH and see a closed papermill shuttered due to cheaper products coming in from South America (and you wonder why the Amazon Rain Forest is being wiped out, duh!!), you know who to thank.
David says
nt
danfromwaltham says
and endorse Richard Tisea. It is so much cleaner this way, no?
Did you see the article last week by Hillary Chabot commenting on the blue Kool-aid drinkers on BMG and John Tierney?
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view.bg?articleid=1061144349
Bob Neer says
Canada. Diarrhea.
Did you know?
Mark L. Bail says
It’s all the rage in Waltham. The premise is that any political discussion can be linked to John Tierney in six steps or less. Here’s how you score it:
Tierney himself has a Tierney number of 0.
Any direct connection to Tierney has a Tierney number of 1.
Add another 1 for every connection beyond that.
danfromwaltham says
Having no retort to my excellent point about those supporting NAFTA and outsourcing, David did the distraction by mentioning Tierney. I am thanful he didn’t delete my comment, for fear of making everyone rethink their criticism of Bain.
Christopher is the only one who validated my NAFTA point but he agrees with free trade with countries at the bottom of the barrel in wages and environmental safeguards. But hey, the limes for your Corona beer need to come from somewhere, why not Mexico as well?
What is that noise? That big sucking sound of good paying jobs going to Mexico? But Dems are not as bad as The Rep? You are right, a Dem candidate will give me that dumb look of being concerned and touch my shoulder. I know, makes many want to puke, right? Glad I voted for Perot and Buchanan in the 90’s.
Mark L. Bail says
Dan. You mentioned the other side of the coin: Richard Tisei. [Note the correct spelling].
Dan, if you think your NAFTA point is so great, complete your argument. NAFTA relates how? I don’t think there’s a chance of eliminating your boorish egocentrism, but I’m hoping–foolishly, some would say–to get you to understand what a red herring is and why it’s not a logical argument.
I don’t know exactly what your claim is. So, if it pleases you to respond, correct the following.:
BMGers think Bain is bad.
A Democratic President and Congress enacted NAFTA.
Therefore, BMGers…
danfromwaltham says
Is Mitt and Bain outsourced jobs. The commercial ther are running even says Mitt sent jobs to Mexico. So let me ask you this, we were warned about the sucking sound of jobs going to Mexico, yet, the big wigs in the Dem. Party could care less at the time. So why are they against outsourcing by Romney, when the biggest outsources are in the Democratic Party, and Obama has done nothing about it.
Therefore, BMG’s should never use the outsourcing argument.
David says
😉
SomervilleTom says
The topic of this thread is Mitt Romney’s apparent duplicity, and Glenn Kessler’s rabid support for Mr. Romney (in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary). None of the items you mention are remotely relevant to this discussion.
danfromwaltham says
Why Dems are saying Mitt ran Bain after 1999 is due to outsourcing by the company during that period, no? All of a sudden, it’s a bad thing?? Again, pointing out the serial hypocrisy of the Dems should not be my job here, please take off the blinders.
SomervilleTom says
We are saying that Mitt Romney ran Bain after 1999 because Bain filed multiple formal SEC statements stating precisely that. That is “bad” because Mitt Romney has been saying, since then, that he left Bain in 1999. The reason it matters is that Bain plundered companies during the period between 1999 and 2002 — it bought a controlling interest in its prey, used that controlling interest to force the company into taking huge and unsustainable debt (often to finance the acquisition itself), used the proceeds from that debt to enrich Bain (and Mitt Romney), and then left behind the rotting, empty, and bankrupt carcass of its prey.
While it’s true that one of the techniques Mitt Romney and Bain Capital used was outsourcing, it is the enthusiasm with which Mr. Romney and Bain plundered their “investments” that disqualifies him for national office. He destroyed KB Toys, and that had nothing to with outsourcing (emphasis mine):
Mitt Romney and Bain Capital similarly plundered and destroyed GS Technologies — in that case, stealing the worker’s pension fund. The company went bankrupt in 2001, but not before Mitt Romney and Bain collected twelve million dollars in net profit.
SomervilleTom says
A new generation of youtube videos uses iframe tags to embed the video in sites like this. The imbedded iframe appears to work in “preview”, but disappears when the comment is posted (the above comment is supposed end with an embed). I’d appreciate some guidance about how to get these clips to appear.
The URL of the video is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fncJZXrzG8k&feature=player_embedded.
Christopher says
First, this is a Democratic blog; we support Democrats.
Second, you have to do better than a Herald column, which are notoriously not reality based.
Third, you’ve chosen sides against what you call the smears against Romney, yet said “smears” are based on better evidence than the allegations against Tierney, not to mention more relevant to the election.
Fourth, for crying out loud learn to spell TISEI; you’ve made the same mistake multiple times.
danfromwaltham says
1. Just support Democrats, good, bad, and the ugly? That type of thinking reminds me of the masses over in the Middle East who whack themselves over the head with a sword during a religious ceremony, until the are bloody.
2. The Herald article mentioned the blog Charley wrote.
3. It would do BMG a tremendous service if the owners of this site shunned Tierney and endorsed R.T. (he has an odd last name). So stop hitting yourself with the sword like everyone else, break ranks, and the rest will follow. Then Dave and Bob will have R.T. over for an interview and formal endorsement.
4. I guess you agree with the outsourcing of jobs do to the free trade agreements, so sad.
Christopher says
This isn’t just some rah-rah support the Red Sox over the Yankees because they are our guys. I’ve already explained at least a couple of times that it’s about the votes they cast which unlike a ball game actually affects people’s lives. I’m actually more OK with free-trade than some here, with safeguards, but at least Dems are conscious of the consequences in a way Republicans are not. I believe in incentivising job creation here through the tax code. Besides we did free trade under Clinton and the economy created 23 Million new jobs. Romney is running as a job creator yet he killed jobs and profited from it as head of Bain and MA was 47th in job creation when he was Governor. Nice try, but I’ll take the D job creation record over that of the Rs any day.
danfromwaltham says
Christopher, Christopher, Christopher.
You know that part of the NAFTA Agreement was the fact that when companies relocated their factories to Mexico, the materials (steel, etc) had to be made in the USA and shipped to Maxico. Short term gain, long term loss. And you wonder why so many people walk around with no health insurance. Then again, it is easier to give people health insurance than it is to create private sector jobs.
Dems are conscious of the consequences? Really? Apparently they are working well since Obama has done NOTHING to fix any of the inequities.
Last point, MA ranked 28th in job creation during Romney’s last year as governor. At least he was moving the needle in the right direction.
bob-gardner says
the same person? It would explain a lot. Or hasn’t anyone noticed that the Hillary Chabot column Dan linked to is actually by Holly Robichaud?
danfromwaltham says
Give the guy his props, geez
kirth says
where everyone feeds the troll? Sadly, just one of the threads where that happens.