Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

The Hypocrisy of Obama’s Bain Bundler

Tags:
Last response: in News & Leisure
Share

The Hypocrisy of Obama’s Bain Bundler
From National Review Online:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/299858/hypocrisy-o...

"As Katrina reports, Mitt Romney left Bain Capital in 1999 to manage the Winter Olympics, two years before GST Steel declared bankruptcy. But that hasn’t stopped President Obama from blaming him for the company’s 2001 collapse. In a new Obama campaign video, ex-steel workers criticize Romney for being “out of touch” with the “average working person.” Left unmentioned (and blameless) is Jonathan Lavine."

Lavine, according to the Los Angeles Times, is a top Obama bundler and a managing director at Bain Capital. Lavine, who has raised over $100,000 for the president, was at the firm when GST Steel declared bankruptcy. So according to the Obama team’s logic, Romney, who had left Bain, is responsible for GST Steel’s demise, but Lavine, who was there, is not? Expect to hear more about this connection.

From the LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-campai...

"Obama also picked up at least half a dozen fundraisers from the finance sector, including one managing director of Bain Capital, the private equity firm founded by his possible GOP rival Mitt Romney. Jonathan Lavine, the chief investment officer of Bain affiliate Sankaty Advisors, was also an Obama fundraiser in 2008, but only joined the reelection effort in recent months, raising between $100,000 and $200,000."

Oh so he isnt in the administration just made some money for the guy, in the same league as Eva longoria........ You are aware of what a bundler is arent you? Not the greatest practice ever but this dude isnt running for president on the platform that he can run a country based on his record at Bain.

I mean if anything this guy should be running for president he is as qualified as Romney.

Im not saying Obama is completely innocent either I just feel like in your fervor to tie any kind of negative person you are taking away from real issues. We have learned nothing about policy from this post, this is just another "Hey look at who he might know!". And it might not even be him who approached this guy, it was probably a campaign coordinator. Again someone who has no influence on policy, who gives us no real insight into the president, and worked in venture capitalism, and raised money for the president..... alongside such phenoms as Tyler Perry........

And again im not proud of this move or happy that an ass like this guy had anything to do with the presidential campaigns but the smear gimmick youve been on recently has really proved nothing.

I think his 4th grade teacher was a j-walker and we know how those socialist commie liberal teachers taught Young Barack about screwing authority.

Also the guy down the hall from him in college had a DUI and i have yet to hear him denounce his relationship with him.

I get so confused.......

That's fine excuse it if you want. I am pointing out the hypocrisy of Obama.

He slams wall street while at the same time giving them a wink wink, and saying "it's ok guys, don't worry about my speeches, you know I have to lie to the stupid masses in order for them to get mad at you and not vote for Romney, wink wink nudge nudge".

I want Obama defeated. I make no bones about this and have never tried to hide my resolve in this matter.
Related ressources

Oh also I found this hilarious. You cant really look up all of Romneys bundlers because he hasn't released them yet.... I wonder why?

At least Obama gives a full list every 3 months. LOL

Once upon a time Obama's mentor as a young lad was Thomas Ayers, father of Bill Ayers, who got Obama his first job and card carrying member of Communist Party USA.

But of course Ayers was "just some guy living in the hood" who's kids went to school with Obama's kids. But there is no connection.

Niet! Ask and ye shall only get the legally required release of information regarding lobbyists.

Quote:
NOTE: Federal Election Commission regulations only require disclosure of funds bundled by registered lobbyists. In 2008, both Barack Obama and John McCain agreed to disclose any bundlers who raised over $50,000 for their campaigns. Obama's re-election campaign is again disclosing those bundlers for the 2012 election. No 2012 Republican presidential candidates have agreed to voluntarily disclose their entire bundlers lists. As such, the only bundlers listed for Republican candidates are registered lobbyists.


Those are all lobbyists! LOL! Remember when Romney gave all of that grief to Santorum and Gingrich over their probable lobbying careers?

http://www.americanbridgepac.org/2012/03/wire/research/...

Here is a bit more detailed info regarding the list of lobbyists you just gave.

wanamingo said:
Niet! Ask and ye shall only get the legally required release of information regarding lobbyists.

Quote:
NOTE: Federal Election Commission regulations only require disclosure of funds bundled by registered lobbyists. In 2008, both Barack Obama and John McCain agreed to disclose any bundlers who raised over $50,000 for their campaigns. Obama's re-election campaign is again disclosing those bundlers for the 2012 election. No 2012 Republican presidential candidates have agreed to voluntarily disclose their entire bundlers lists. As such, the only bundlers listed for Republican candidates are registered lobbyists.


Those are all lobbyists! LOL! Remember when Romney gave all of that grief to Santorum and Gingrich over their probable lobbying careers?

http://www.americanbridgepac.org/2012/03/wire/research/...

Here is a bit more detailed info regarding the list of lobbyists you just gave.


Ah, gotcha. I didn't realize that.

Yeah, I do remember Romeny giving Santorum grief for that.

I wonder how much both are raising by the bundlers under $50,000 NOT reported? This what Hillary did in 2008. She had tons of bundlers running around giving $500 here $1000 there, all under the radar for the most part.

wanamingo said:
Oh it gets better..... From the link you gave to opensecrets their infographic is priceless.

http://assets.opensecrets.org/pres12/img/bundlers.png

Check that Romney quote they include. And good for Ron Paul for not using any bundlers at all.



Sigh, and McCain/Feingold was supposed to "get money out of politics".

I would vote for Ron Paul. He is right about nearly everything except foreign policy and our military. On those two things he is just plain kooky. A vote for Paul in this election is a vote for Obama i'm afraid, and this country will not be recognizeable in 4 years if Obama is re-elected.

20 Bundlers named "Michael" raised $4 million. Odd.

Problem here is, the mentality that these venture types are bad or evil, which many on both sides, who have actually dealt with them know far much more, and know better.
So, until people stop leaning on certain supposed taboos, and look for themselves, ask a mayor, or a governor, where they are connected directly to the people, the state and its business climate, and the wok theyve done with these people and companies, raising it to a federal level, then claiming they are evile, its because hes a bigot, and playing another card, instead of actually doing something, and helping this economy.
Im tired of Obamas attitudes towards whatever, where everything is evil, everything is greed, everything is sexually oriented etc etc etc, the world simply doesnt work this way, and for those who believe its so...what can I say?

Oldmangamer_73 said:
The Hypocrisy of Obama’s Bain Bundler
From National Review Online:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/299858/hypocrisy-o...

"As Katrina reports, Mitt Romney left Bain Capital in 1999 to manage the Winter Olympics, two years before GST Steel declared bankruptcy. But that hasn’t stopped President Obama from blaming him for the company’s 2001 collapse. In a new Obama campaign video, ex-steel workers criticize Romney for being “out of touch” with the “average working person.” Left unmentioned (and blameless) is Jonathan Lavine."

Lavine, according to the Los Angeles Times, is a top Obama bundler and a managing director at Bain Capital. Lavine, who has raised over $100,000 for the president, was at the firm when GST Steel declared bankruptcy. So according to the Obama team’s logic, Romney, who had left Bain, is responsible for GST Steel’s demise, but Lavine, who was there, is not? Expect to hear more about this connection.

From the LA Times:
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-campai...

"Obama also picked up at least half a dozen fundraisers from the finance sector, including one managing director of Bain Capital, the private equity firm founded by his possible GOP rival Mitt Romney. Jonathan Lavine, the chief investment officer of Bain affiliate Sankaty Advisors, was also an Obama fundraiser in 2008, but only joined the reelection effort in recent months, raising between $100,000 and $200,000.
Politics is dirty! That is the name of the game.

Whats not surprising is, its worse in politics today than it is in the business world, because in politics, you are the law.
Theres good pols too, just as there is in these ventures, but if youre good at CYA, and good at ripping people off, then youre ready for the big show.
And its not inclusive of one side.

Oldmangamer_73 said:
Once upon a time Obama's mentor as a young lad was Thomas Ayers, father of Bill Ayers, who got Obama his first job and card carrying member of Communist Party USA.

But of course Ayers was "just some guy living in the hood" who's kids went to school with Obama's kids. But there is no connection.

Ayers was never a Communist. Complete crap!

jsc said:
Well, see, dogman. It is actually possible to found a communist group without being one.

I know. I states he founded one...wasn't labeling him communist.

I may have liberal views, but I am not a Democrat.

dogman_1234 said:
Yup. 2 Billion down the...wherever it went. Also worked for JP Morgan as well just recently!

The big difference here is that the money that JP Morgan lost was JP Morgan money. It didn't belong to private investors.

jsc said:
The big difference here is that the money that JP Morgan lost was JP Morgan money. It didn't belong to private investors.


Keep in mind they still made 19 billion with a B on the deal instead of 21 billion. Not really a net loss just not a full potential gain.
Ask the community
!