Romney's Press Secretary Cusses Out Media after Romney Photo Op in Poland

Another country, another bad headline for Romney on his foreign trip this time in Poland.

Would bet many press secretaries over the years would have loved to make similar comments to the media but they had the class not to act like jerk.  Romney has been dissing the American press on this foreign trip starting with his ignoring the American press when he was at a press conference with Prime Minister Cameron.  Instead only the British press were recognized which goes against protocol but Romney seems to make it up as he goes as we have been witnessing.

Talk about zero class -- read this transcript with remarks from his press secretary:

When members of the press tried to ask Romney about some of the mishaps on his trip, his traveling press secretary Rick Gorka verbally dressed down reporters. 

Here's a transcript of the questions and Gorka's response: 

CNN: "Governor Romney are you concerned about some of the mishaps of your trip? 

NYT: "Governor Romney do you have a statement for the Palestinians?

Washington Post: "What about your gaffes? 

NYT: "Governor Romney do you feel that your gaffes have overshadowed your foreign trip?" 

CNN: "Governor Romney just a few questions sir, you haven't taken but three questions on this trip from the press! 

Gorka: "Show some respect" 

NYT: "We haven't had another chance to ask a question..." 

Gorka: "Kiss my ass. This is a Holy site for the Polish people. Show some respect." 

Moments later, Gorka told Jonathan Martin, a reporter for Politico, to "shove it." About a half-hour later, the aide called reporters to apologize. 

Gorka's comments to the media came just hours before Romney's foreign policy speech in Warsaw. 

Source:  CNN

Juvenile behavior seems to be the norm with this Romney campaign not to mention not living in reality.  When they tried to keep all media out of the fundraiser in Israel, they finally relented but the bad taste was left with the media.  Best reason I can think of for excluding all press was Romney didn't want the media to see him pandering to his billionaire campaign bank roller Adelson whose dollars from his gambling empire in McCau are helping fund the Romney campaign.

It looks like when Adelson says jump, Romney says "how high" because nothing else makes sense about Romney's comments in Israel that has the Palestinians very disgusted not to mention the fact that he declared Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.  That's okay in Romneyland as it pandered to Adelson while playing to the conservative pundits and the far right who refuse to acknowledge that Jerusalem is not recognized as the capital of Israel by 99% of countries because it is the home to many religions.

Romney has spent a lot of time walking back comments he made on this trip starting  London dissing the British handling of the Olympics, couldn't remember the opposition leader's name (where was his staff to remind), and the Anglo Saxon comment against Obama for starters.  We must not forget his dissing his wife and her horse at the Olympics which was another one of those "I know nothing" moments which he has a lot of in this campaign as he hides his taxes prior to 2010 and even then doesn't release all of 2010.

His pandering to the far right is leaving a lot of Republicans shaking their heads and asking why because he is fast losing support of the more common sense Republicans who want someone with a backbone to be President.  Speaking of backbone, Michael Tomasky, at The Daily Beast has an excellent article about Mitt's Missing Backbone:

Romney’s defenders say his combative remarks in Israel prove he’s no wimp. What they really show is the same cowardly deference to the right that has inspired countless flip-flops. 

What’s in a word? I guess a lot. All of us here at NewsBeast knew the word “wimp” would carry a charge and get people to pay attention. So to the extent that I have people’s attention, what I really would like them to focus on is the question of what makes this guy tick, and more specifically on his total lack of political backbone, because that seems to me a very serious potential shortcoming in someone who’s aiming to be president of the United States, and one that ought to be discussed more than we’re discussing it. 

What’s in a word? I guess a lot. All of us here at NewsBeast knew the word “wimp” would carry a charge and get people to pay attention. So to the extent that I have people’s attention, what I really would like them to focus on is the question of what makes this guy tick, and more specifically on his total lack of political backbone, because that seems to me a very serious potential shortcoming in someone who’s aiming to be president of the United States, and one that ought to be discussed more than we’re discussing it.

All of Romney’s ideological somersaults can be similarly described. Good policy has nothing to do with any of them. Passing muster with the right is the only thing. And no, everyone doesn’t do this. Soledad O’Brien said to me on CNN Monday morning: come on, if we had a dime for every time a politician flip-flopped, we could retire. Put that way, true enough. But actually, if you look at really successful politicians, they are surprisingly constant in their views, especially the views that truly define their character and identity.

It isn’t fine that Romney has changed his view on every issue. It’s pathetic. It suggests that he lives in fear of America’s right wing. That’s the real wimp factor.  

Read more from Tomasky's article at The Daily Beast

Watching Tomasky last night on one of the shows was struck at how articulate he was at getting his points across and had his facts lined up.  No one was going to put words in his mouth.  I have yet to run across anything he has said not backed up with the facts but yet he is trashed in conservative circles because he doesn't play their game of pandering to Romney.  He tells it like it is which is refreshing.  BTW, I have seen him go after Obama as well as Romney.  He is a true journalist in my book who isn't afraid to make people mad with his comments which are based on fact not spin.

The headline with "Wimp" IMHO was perfect to bring in readers but also describes Romney exactly as he panders to donors like Adelson in Israel and the far right wing who is out of control today with their 'my way or no way' demands.  Only thing Romney stands up on is his taxes so the question from most thinking people is "What is he hiding?"  With every passing day you have to wonder if the tax experts are correct that he took the amnesty offered by the Federal Government for Swiss Bank Accounts.  That would make more sense then the Romney statement if he overpaid his taxes he couldn't be President.  For some reason when the media brings up taxes, Romney says some pretty dumb things -- that was one of the dumbest.

If Obama made gaffes like Romney has made overseas which Romney keeps trying to walk back, the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Fox News, Republicans in the House and Senate, and establishment types would be all over the air trashing Obama for not being ready for prime time to be President.  When it comes to Romney, those same people, for the most part, report he has had a great trip and if there have been any hiccups, it is the media's fault.  The exception is when the media talks to Republican consultants who want to remain anonymous who will say Romney has had a horrible trip with all the gaffes and misstatements.

Anyone with a brain knows this visit has been nothing but a fundraising junket for Romney along with photo ops but Romney has turned the trip into a foreign policy nightmare.  Someone needs to tell Romney he is not the President and the Cold War has been over for years.  He wants to give the Defense Department over $2 trillion more dollars to counter the geopolitical threat of the Russians, Iran, and China. Sitting here shaking my head at how ludicrous that would be.

No wonder the head of Lockheed was with Cheney lobbying in the Congress.  He smells more dollars coming their way if Romney wins.  That is another reason not to vote for Romney -- defense needs to take some cuts maybe not as drastic as sequestering but there is plenty to cut if members of Congress would quit pandering to defense contractors for donations and in exchange for funding programs they want.

Romney with his advisers are a disaster waiting to happen every day.  When Romney goes off the script from reading from his teleprompter he gets in even bigger trouble with his comments.  Speaking of teleprompters, Obama isn't the only politician to use them as Romney and most others use them as well.  Imagine that with all the stories coming out of the conservative media focusing on the Obama teleprompter like he was the only one who used a teleprompter.

What are we learning from this election so far?  Romney on foreign soil could not control his mouth along with his aides making foreign policy situations worse and leaving the adults to clean up his mess.  Didn't take the Israeli's long before leadership was praising Obama for what he has done for the security of Israel after Romney's remarks against Obama.  This trip gave us a glimpse he would be the pander in chief in the White House to what people like the billionaire Adelson tell him.  Looks like Bibi convinced Romney not to meet with the opposition leader in Israel when the meeting was already set.  He cancelled at the last minute leaving people to wonder if  Netanyahu is now telling Romney what to do.

Is that someone you want as President who panders almost every day?  Not this Republican -- would suggest that people with blinders still on, take them off and discover that Romney would be the worst person to be President.  The conservative media is feeding all of us a bunch of lies in order to get us to hate Obama so we will vote for Romney.  That is no way to run an election and the big donors behind Romney who are funding this disaster should be ashamed but you have to have a conscience to be ashamed and obvious from the last few months that a person with a conscience doesn't exist in Romneyland as they would quit.

Robert Reich: The Truth About Obama's Tax Proposal (and the Lies the Regressives Are Telling About It)

Over the years I have not always agreed with Robert Reich but one thing I will say on his behalf is that he is not afraid to go after members of both parties.  When a Democrat steps out of bounds, he pounces on them the same as Republicans.  Didn't know who he was until Monicagate and then we all learned how honest he was.

When I read this, a lot of what I have been questioning began to make sense.  My comprehension level is pretty high but what the Romney Republicans were against the Obama Tax Proposal, it set off the BS meter.  Then it clicked.  We have been fed a narrative on Obama that the leaders of the Romney Republican Party wanted us to believe in order to vote for Romney over Obama.  Note that I said vote for not 'support' Romney.  This is not even close to being about voting for Romney but ousting Obama.  That is not how you win elections and is flat out stupid.  Many Republicans warned the RNC and other leaders in 2008 that it would be the last election they would vote for a candidate they didn't like.  Now that same leadership thinks those people are now going to vote for Romney in 2012 because they believe they have sufficiently demonized Obama?  My bet is that it is not going to happen.

When you take off the blinders you realize this is an honest proposal and the comments coming out of Romney Republican leaders that this will be a huge tax hike on small business is a LIE!  The only small business owners affected earn over $250,000 a year and anything over the $250,000 will be taxed at the Clinton tax level which Romney praised yesterday.  That amounts to 3.3% of small business owners a far cry from most small business will get a tax hike being touted by the Romney Republicans.  BTW someone forgot to tell him that Clinton raised taxes not lowered them.  Obama has signed laws that lowered taxes and fees 17 times during his Presidency.  You don't hear that out of the Romney Republicans that accuse him of being the biggest liberal tax and spend President ever.  It is simply not true.  When Obama has a plan to cut Government, the Republican House tosses it out right away.

President Reagan worked with then Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill from MA to get bills passed that would help all Americans not just the wealthy.  Reagan was about helping those who needed help not some fat cat Wall Street types who could care less about anything but their bottom line and how much richer they can become who Romney favors who seem to all be wealthy white guys like the Koch Brothers.

It seems that the bought and paid for Romney along with some Republicans who are speaking out are more worried about the rich getting a tax hike when the vast majority of jobs are created by small business not the wealthy who for the most part have sent jobs overseas including Romney when he was head of Bain.   Guess he is now using the Democrat tactic of accusing your opponent of what you are doing even if it is not true.

When Rick Santorum said that Romney was the worst person in America to be the Republican nominee, he wasn't kidding.  He was 100% correct.  Everyday you understand even more how right he was.

The Truth About Obama's Tax Proposal (and the Lies the Regressives Are Telling About It)

Robert Reich 

Posted: 07/10/2012 11:19 am 

To hear the media report it, President Obama is proposing a tax increase on wealthy Americans. That's misleading at best. He's proposing that everyone receive a continuation of the Bush tax cuts on the first $250,000 of their incomes. Any dollars they earn in excess of $250,000 will be taxed at the old Clinton-era rates. 

Get it? Everyone is treated exactly the same. Everyone gets a one-year extension of the Bush tax cut on the first $250,000 of income. No "class warfare." 

Yet regressive Republicans want Americans to believe differently. The editorial writers of the Wall Street Journal say the president wants to extend the Bush tax cuts only "for some taxpayers." They urge House Republicans to extend the Bush tax cuts for "everyone" and thereby put Senate Democrats on the spot by "forcing them to choose between extending rates for everyone and accepting Mr. Obama's tax increase." 

Pure demagoguery. 

Regressives also want Americans to think the president's proposal would hurt "tens of thousands of job-creating businesses," as the Journal puts it. 

More baloney. 

A small business owner earning $251,000 would pay the Bush rate on the first $250,000 and the old Clinton rate on just $1,000. 

Congress's Joint Tax Committee estimates that in 2013 about 940,000 taxpayers would have enough business income to break through the $250,000 ceiling -- and, again, they'd pay additional taxes only on dollars earned above $250,000.  

All told, less than 3 percent of small business owners would even reach the $250,000 threshold. 

A third lie is Obama's proposal will "increase uncertainly and further retard investment and job creation," as the Journal puts it. 

Don't believe it. 

The real reason businesses aren't creating more jobs is American consumers -- whose purchases constitute 70 percent of U.S. economic activity -- don't have the money to buy more, and they can no longer borrow as before. Businesses won't invest and hire without consumers. Even as executive pay keeps rising, the median wage keeps dropping -- largely because businesses keep whacking payrolls. 

The only people who'd have to pay substantially more taxes under Obama's proposal are those earning far in excess of $250,000 -- and they aren't small businesses. They're the fattest of corpulent felines. Their spending will not be affected if their official tax rate rises from the Bush 35 percent to the Bill Clinton 39.6 percent. 

In fact, most of these people's income is unearned -- capital gains and dividends that are now taxed at only 15 percent. If the Bush tax cuts expire on schedule, the capital gains rate would return to the same 20 percent it was under Bill Clinton (the Affordable Care Act would add a 3.8 percent surcharge).

Funny, I don't remember the economy suffering under Bill Clinton's taxes. I was in Clinton's cabinet, so perhaps my memory is self-serving. But I seem to recall that the economy generated 22 million net new jobs during those years, unemployment fell dramatically, almost everyone's income grew, poverty dropped, and the economy soared. In fact, it was the strongest and best economy we've had in anyone's memory. 

In sum: Don't fall for these big lies -- Obama wants to extend the Bush tax cut "only for some people," small businesses will be badly hit, businesses won't hire because of uncertainty this proposal would create, or the Clinton-era tax levels crippled the economy, 

A ton of corporate and billionaire money is behind these lies and others like them, as well as formidable mouthpieces of the regressive right such as Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal editorial page. 

The truth is already a casualty of this election year. That's why it's so important for you to spread it. 

ROBERT B. REICH, Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley, was Secretary of Labor in the Clinton administration. Time Magazine named him one of the ten most effective cabinet secretaries of the last century. He has written thirteen books, including the best sellers "Aftershock" and "The Work of Nations." His latest is an e-book, "Beyond Outrage." He is also a founding editor of the American Prospect magazine and chairman of Common Cause.