Mitt Romney Bain Capital Filings Link Him To Politically Problematic Companies After 1999 WASHINGTON -- The question over when Mitt Romney officially left Bain Capital is obscuring a more substantive debate that relates to the presidential campaign. The presumptive Republican nominee insists he never signed off on the business decisions related to outsourcing that turned the private equity firm into a political lightning rod. But neither he nor his campaign have said whether he agrees with those decisions, even if he was powerless over them when they were made. The Huffington Post asked top Romney adviser Kevin Madden this very question Monday morning during an appearance on MSNBC and received the following response: Those decisions were made by folks that were running the company differently. So I don't have the details of what decision-making went into it. The answer mirrors a more evasive response to a similar question that senior adviser Ed Gillespie gave Sunday on "Meet the Press." DDi would prove to be a problem for Romney shortly thereafter. Also on HuffPost:
The Internet Defense League - Protecting the Free Internet since 2012. An Interactive Map of the Dark-Money Universe Tracking the flow and impact of money in politics has long been one of Mother Jones' main beats. Since the 2010 Citizens United decision paved the way for a new era of bottomless election spending, we've been focused on what we call "dark money"—the hundreds of millions of dollars being dropped by outside groups, much of it without full disclosure of where it's coming from. The key players in this new world are super-PACs, which may raise and spend unlimited sums of money for or against candidates; and 501(c) nonprofit groups, which may make political ads and give money to super-PACs without disclosing their donors. We wanted to visualize the major super-PACs and 501(c)s in a way that would provide both a good overview of outside spending in this election cycle as well as detailed information about each group. The current version of this chart shows just one slice of the dark-money universe: There are hundreds of smaller super-PACs and 501(c)s that are not included in this version.
The GDELT Project Simple explanation of why capitalism is unfair Posted 1 year ago on July 29, 2012, 1:24 a.m. EST by DemandTheGoodLifeDotCom (3213) from New York, NY This content is user submitted and not an official statement The entire system of capitalism is unfair because it is based on theft and exploitation and is undemocratic. Capitalism is based on theft because it is based entirely on the privatization of the planet and its resources. Since Mother Nature does not have a store where you can purchase the planet, 100% of this privatization came by way of pillage and plunder. Privatization of the Earth and its resources means you are claiming control over a portion of the planet for your own private benefit to the exclusion of everyone else and using whatever force is necessary to maintain your control. When you privatize a part of the planet, you are stealing that part of the planet from everyone else. Every single good and service we produce in our economy are produced using these stolen resources. Exploitation by the Lucky What Is Fair
The Venus Project Entretien (à la maison) : le pouvoir antisocial de l'argent Entretien (à la maison) avec "avantgardeeconomique.fr" : le pouvoir antisocial de l'argent J'ai reçu à la maison, il y a quelque temps, un jeune homme venu de Paris pour la circonstance, et voici la trace de notre conversation (ça se sent un peu, que je commence à être crevé), après un gros travail de montage de sa part, je le remercie : Voici LE PLAN détaillé de ce film, tel que le présente ce jeune journaliste : « Étienne Chouard nous montre comment le mécanisme de l'élection politique est intimement lié au pouvoir de l'argent. I/ Introduction •Le tirage au sort •L'accusation de "complotisme". II/ Le pouvoir économique •Comment fonctionne la création monétaire •Les plus riches auto-proclamés indispensables aux processus de création de richesse •La nécessité de limiter les plus hauts revenus •Les jeunes générations qui se tournent vers la finance •Les retraites •La question de la propriété privée •La fin du capitalisme ?
Flightradar24.com - Live flight tracker! De "Yes we can" à "Yes we do" ? Election moins passionnante à bien des égards que celle de 2008, la confirmation d’Obama peut nous permettre de dégager quelques leçons utiles. On a beaucoup entendu dire que les montagnes de fric dépensé montraient définitivement que la démocratie US est confisquée par une classe possédante qui choisit en amont et se débrouille d’une manière ou d’une autre pour que le résultat coïncide avec ses « pronostics ».Or la réalité est loin d'être tout à fait celle-là. Oui l'argent a joué un rôle, évidemment. Et les deux principaux camps ont fait la course aux sponsors de manière décomplexée ainsi qu'il est d'usage en cette contrée qui n'en fait pas un sujet tabou, encore moins "immoral". Les grands groupes ont abondé les caisses à coups de millions de dollars pour les deux grands partis en lice. Depuis 2008, les fameux réseaux d'Obama n'ont jamais cessé leur activisme social. "Dear MoveOn member, You did it. Et ce n'est pas par complaisance qu'ils ont continué le combat. "I miss that guy.
WWF conserves our planet, habitats, & species like the Panda & Tiger