http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/29/charges-new-black-panthers-dropped-obama-justice-dept/

Charges brought against three members of the New Black Panther Party for Self-Defense under the Bush administration have been dropped by the Obama Justice Department, FOX News has learned.

The charges stemmed from an incident at a Philadelphia polling place on Election Day 2008 when three members of the party were accused of trying to threaten voters and block poll and campaign workers by the threat of force — one even brandishing what prosecutors call a deadly weapon.

The three black panthers, Minister King Samir Shabazz, Malik Zulu Shabazz and Jerry Jackson were charged in a civil complaint in the final days of the Bush administration with violating the voter rights act by using coercion, threats and intimidation. Shabazz allegedly held a nightstick or baton that prosecutors said he pointed at people and menacingly tapped it. Prosecutors also say he “supports racially motivated violence against non-blacks and Jews.”

The Obama administration won the case last month, but moved to dismiss the charges on May 15.

Click here to see FOX News video from the scene on election day.

Click to watch the incident on YouTube.

The complaint says the men hurled racial slurs at both blacks and whites.

A poll watcher who provided an affidavit to prosecutors in the case noted that Bartle Bull, who worked as a civil rights lawyer in the south in the 1960’s and is a former campaign manager for Robert Kennedy, said it was the most blatant form of voter intimidation he had ever seen.

In his affidavit, obtained by FOX News, Bull wrote “I watched the two uniformed men confront voters and attempt to intimidate voters. They were positioned in a location that forced every voter to pass in close proximity to them. The weapon was openly displayed and brandished in plain sight of voters.”

He also said they tried to “interfere with the work of other poll observers … whom the uniformed men apparently believed did not share their preferences politically,” noting that one of the panthers turned toward the white poll observers and said “you are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.”

Black Panthers

Share on Facebook

Share This

1. Pigford is the biggest scam in U.S. history.
2. Pigford was a chronic litigator. His claims of discrimination had been investigated at least three times, and a previous lawsuit of his had been dismissed “with prejudice,” meaning he should never have been allowed to make another claim on the same grounds. He did, though, and the Clinton Department of Agriculture basically gave away the store.
3. The claims of discrimination are highly suspect. They encompass the whole nation, including counties where the Department of Agriculture staff is entirely black. Black farmers are one percent of the farming population, yet over the period at issue, they were getting over three percent of USDA loans. That looks like discrimination against white farmers, if anything.
4. Worst of all, the standards for joining these class action lawsuits are laughably low. You are supposed to have been a farmer between 1981 and 1996; you are supposed to have applied for a USDA loan; and you are supposed to have been discriminated against and filed a complaint. Guess what, though: there is essentially no requirement that you prove any of those things! If you can’t produce a copy of your complaint, for example, the court will accept an affidavit from a non-family member saying that you did so file a complaint. Basically, to get on the Pigford gravy train, you just have to be black.
5. The National Black Farmers Association knows of only 18,000 black farmers in the United States. Number of discrimination claims under Pigford II? Ninety-four thousand. I got those numbers from a November 29 statement by Representative Michelle Bachmann, who has waged a lonely battle in Congress to get some light thrown on the Pigford scam-athon.
6. To no avail: This raid on the Treasury was waved through Congress and signed by the President; though to be fair, Senate Republicans did try to cut down the attorneys’ fees in the Indian case from $100 million to $50 million — unsuccessfully, of course.
7. Now listen to what our President said on signing this monstrous act of theft. Listen, and weep for our republic. Quote: “While I am pleased that this Act reflects important progress, much work remains to be done to address other claims of past discrimination made by women and Hispanic farmers against the Department of Agriculture as well as to address needs of tribal communities.” End quote.
8. Yes, you heard the man right. Pigford is just the beginning! Women farmers and Hispanic farmers have their own Pigfords under way. Then, no doubt, there will be gay Pigfords, Asian-Pacific-Islander Pigfords, Muslim Pigfords, Hmong Pigfords, Wiccan Pigfords, and on and on to the crack of doom, billions of dollars sluicing out of the Treasury into the pockets of anyone who can wave an affidavit signed by his next-door neighbor — anyone, of course, except straight white males.
9. Pay up, suckers. This is “important progress.” The President said so.

Share on Facebook

Share This

We already have paths of opportunity for all hard-working Americans to enter the middle class: hard work, education, the military, police work, the trades, not getting pregnant, graduating from high school, we don’t need some new plan, or a new politician. (http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/poverty says: “As President, his life experiences inform his efforts to create a path of opportunity for all hard-working Americans to enter the middle class”. Obama has created a path for our formerly wealthy to enter the middle class, unfortunately.

Share on Facebook

Share This

This article from Peggy Noonen, is the best commentary I have seen about the debate. Here are my favorite parts:

…The foreign-policy discussion, though limited, was marked by a new sobriety. There was no spirit of adventurism, there were no burly promises of victories around the corner and lights at the ends of tunnels. It was more muted than that, more realistic, different in tone and tenor from four and eight years ago. This signaled a real shift, and a heartening one.

No one was dreamy. Those on the stage staked a claim in the reality-based community. Mitt Romney, asked if it’s time to bring our combat troops home from Afghanistan, said yes, “as soon as we possibly can.” Then, more interestingly, he offered, “I think we’ve learned some important lessons in our experience in Afghanistan. . . . We’ve learned that our troops shouldn’t go off and try and fight a war of independence for another nation. Only the Afghanis can win Afghanistan’s independence from the Taliban.”

The last sentence is so thumpingly obvious Romney was soon under pressure to recant, or rather clarify.

Every candidate who was asked took issue with U.S. involvement in Libya. Michele Bachmann asserted no “American interests” were at stake: “We were not attacked. We were not threatened with attack.” Newt Gingrich spoke of “fundamentally . . . reassessing our entire strategy in the region.” Ron Paul said we should get our troops home. Tim Pawlenty nattered on about something, but even he didn’t take an opportunity to ask for patience on Afghanistan. John Huntsman, who was not announced and not present at the debate, told CNN he has doubts about the cost of Afghanistan and the likelihood of U.S. success there.

All of this had the sound of the Republican Party inching its way back from 10 years of un-Republican behavior, from a kind of bullying dreaminess about the world: “Everyone wants to be like us.” Actually, everyone doesn’t. There are days when even we, with our political paralysis, financial collapse and coarse culture, don’t want to be like us.

Does this suggest a return of isolationism, as some critics have said? No, and not necessarily by any means. Isolationists think they can be isolated, which is just another form of romanticism and unreality. We live in the world. We will never again be apart from it; trade and technology wouldn’t allow us to if we wanted to. We have real alliances and real foes. But there is little taste now for what is fast becoming an old vision that progress can be made and U.S. security enhanced through invasion, pacification and occupation. There is little taste for the idea that we can easily, or even arduously, force the complete cultural change of other hearts and other minds. Terrorism is a threat. There are many ways to fight it.

But the larger point is that sometimes parties step away from themselves, stop being what they are. The Democrats are doing it now, in their soggy interventionism in Libya. So it’s especially good to see the Republicans start to return to themselves, to their essential nature as a party, which was invented to be genially sober, like Lincoln, optimistic but not unrealistic, like Reagan, and accepting that life has limits and it’s not unpatriotic to say so.

A flurry of polls this week show the public is on the side of the new sobriety. CNN had 62% now opposing the war in Afghanistan, just 36% in favor. CBS News found 64% want the number of U.S. troops decreased, and 51% said the U.S. shouldn’t be in Afghanistan at all. A Washington Post/ABC News poll said 54% of respondents feel the war has not been worth fighting, and 73% said the U.S. should withdraw combat forces this summer. A Rasmussen survey found a combined 56% who said the U.S. should withdraw from Afghanistan immediately or on a firm timetable, up four points since March.

What has been behind decline in support for the war? The obvious. It has gone on almost 10 years. It is America’s longest war. We have been there longer than the Soviets were. No one in a position of authority credibly or coherently explains the path to victory, or even what victory would look like. Are we losing young men so that a year from now we can commence 10 years of peace talks with the Taliban? Toward what end? What will we be asking for, that they be nice?

America is now full of veterans of Afghanistan, and while many will agree with the original mission, or the current mission as they understand it, it is certain that at the American dinner table the cost, complexity and confusion of the effort are being discussed. And the killing of Osama bin Laden provided a psychic endpoint to the drama. The day we went into Afghanistan, we were trying to find him and kill him. Six weeks ago, we found him and killed him. All wars run on a great rush of feeling, of fervor. That feeling and fervor have on an essential level been satisfied.

But there’s something else, probably the most important fact of all.

We are as a nation, on paper, almost bankrupt. Or bankrupt, depending on how you judge. Among the Republican candidates for president, there is a growing awareness that America does not have a foreign policy unless we have the money to pay for it. We do not have an army unless we can fund it. We do not have diplomacy and a diplomatic structure without money. We do not have alliances and friendships sealed by aid without money. We do not go forward and impress the nations with our values, might and leadership without money.

We cannot lead, or even be an example, without money. And we are out of it. Therefore, reordering our financial life and seeing to our financial strength is the single most constructive thing we can do to create and maintain a sound U.S. foreign policy. If we want to be safe in the world, we must be sturdy at home.

That is why those inclined to take an unfriendly or competitive view toward us increasingly see us as a paper tiger. Because they hold our paper.

The problem with Afghanistan, and Iraq for that matter, is not only that after 10 years our efforts have turned out of be—polite word—inconclusive. We are spending money we don’t have for aims we cannot even articulate.

Romney was CEO of a company that charged companies for advice (Bain Consulting). When Romney left, they went into financial problems. He returned, and amazingly turned them around. The 2002 Winter Olympics ran out of money, there was scandal, and they were embarrassing. He turned them around. Massachusetts had a 2.3 billion dollar debt, he removed the debt without raising taxes. Romney is the only candidate with the training, and experience to turn our Nation around.

From JohnH:

Peggy Noonan is very thoughtful and always good, This one was very good!

A correction: Mitt Romney was Bain and Company’s youngest VP’s when he left this consulting firm…one of the three top consulting firms in the world today.  When they fell into difficulties they called Mitt back to fix them thinking it would take 2-3 years to do it. After 9 months the fix was in place and Mitt left in 12 months not accepting a penny for the job from his old friends and mentors. This is a classic story where the student’s abilities grew past that of his teachers. The brilliance of this firm was often referred to as the “Bain Way”. Mitt Romney’s feats of business acumen exceeded his teachers in many ways…doing things people did not believe could be done, but Mitt did it!!! Many of his partners and other firms on the receiving end of Mitt’s skills liked to drop the phrase, “The Mitt way” or “The Romney way”. He didn’t like the aggrandizement.

One of my favorite things about Mitt’s work was the average return on investment at his start up was 113% average for the 14 years he was CEO at Bain Capital, Inc

Share on Facebook

Share This

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_pimp

Poverty pimp or “professional poverty pimp” is a pejorative label used to convey that an individual or group is benefiting unduly by acting as an intermediary on behalf of the poor, the disadvantaged, or some other “victimized” groups.

Those who use this appellation suggest that those so labeled profit unduly from the misfortune of others, and therefore do not really wish the societal problems that they appear to work on to be eliminated permanently, as it is not in their own interest for this to happen.

The most frequent targets of this accusation are those receiving government funding or that solicit private charity to work on issues on behalf of various disadvantaged individuals or groups, but who never seem to be able to show any amelioration of the problems experienced by their target population. Some even suggest that that if profit were eliminated as a factor, greater steps in the alleviation of the oppressive situations could begin to truly occur.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/poverty

“President Obama has been a lifelong advocate for the poor. As a young college graduate, he rejected the high salaries of corporate America and moved to the South Side of Chicago to work as a community organizer.”

Obama shouldn’t pat himself on the back for “rejected the high salaries of corporate America and moved to the South Side of Chicago to work as a community organizer” unless he can point to improvement in their lives, because the way he explains it, it sounds like he did it for himself more than for him… after all it did lead to him becoming president, right? Not a bad career path, so that he can put his own kids in private school, and his wife can fly all over the world staying in posh hotels, telling us all how much they care.

On the other hand, there is nothing offensive about anything Obama has said about poverty. We should want our politicians to care about the poor. If he was just talking, that would be bad, but at least he did something. We can’t assume that he did it just for his career. This is more than Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, or John Edwards did. It sounds a little self righteous to say, that “he rejected the high salaries”… they could have just said that he made different choices. The real question is did Romney fight poverty more, by making businesses more competitive, or did Obama’s make the world better? What do you think?

Share on Facebook

Share This

Andrew Cline: Says that Ron Paul was Commander In Chief in that he would tell the generals what to do, and not ask for their advice… sounds great in a pound your chest sort of way, but Romney didn’t say he would listen to his generals on weather or not we should be in Afghanistan or not, but HOW WE CAN LEAVE AND STILL HAVE A STABLE GOVERNMENT. We have to listen to the people on the ground, if you want to know what is happening on the ground… not that you are going to let them set policy, just that you are going to listen to their advice about how fast you can leave, how well the Afgan police are trained, etc… Lets not pretend that 30second sound bights can be taken out of context, and prove the only one who isn’t going to let his generals boss him around.

Andrew Cline: Half an hour into this debate, Romney is shining as the most polished candidate with the smartest, most well-considered answers. He looks like the adult in the room. Gingrich, a super-smart guy, doesn’t have enough time to vent his brain on each question…

Rich Lowry: Worst: Pawlenty. Seems weak and evasive on “ObamneyCare.”

Katrina Trinko: Asked about Romneycare, Mitt Romney defended it. “Ours was a state plan, a state solution.” He also cited Obamacare’s $1 trillion in spending and $500 billion in Medicare cuts as crucial differences.

Tim Pawlenty refused to double down on the Obamneycare charge, merely saying, after being pressed, “President Obama is the person who I quoted in saying that he looked at Massachusetts in designing his program. Using the term ObamneyCare is a reflection of the President’s comments.”

“My guess is the President is going to eat those words,” Romney rejoined, pointing out Obama had never called him to ask about what he had done in Massachusetts. “And I can’t wait to debate him.”

Stanley Kurtz: Obama Diminished, Romney Undiminished: … That said, I think Romney has come across well

myclob: Rick Santorum sounds angry. Good thing that Newt isn’t going to let a Muslim sneak into his presidential cabinet! Nice how Tim Pawlenty copied Romney on the Bruins, criticizes Romney behind his back, but can’t be a man and do it to his face.

Daniel Foster: Pawlenty was average to poor.

http://twitter.com/#!/EricFehrn

Romney says bankruptcy reorganization saved auto industry, not bailout checks.

Romney: I’ll repeal Obamacare, and in meantime give waivers to states so they can determine their own healthcare futures

Romney delivers strong indictment of Obama’s failed economic policies. Wouldn’t let John King cut him off.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Now he’s in the “hot seat” on global warming, a Post headline informs us. Romney has said that he believes global warming is real and that humans are contributing to it.

Whoa! Sorry, bub, but if you’re a Republican presidential contender, this is not an ideologically approved position. None other than Rush Limbaugh says Romney is history — “Bye-bye, nomination.”

One can infer that Romney is not Limbaugh’s candidate of choice, but is it really so remarkable that Romney would accept scientific evidence that Earth’s climate is changing and that humans, because of their historically unprecedented carbon emissions, might contribute to that effect?

Never mind that Romney couched his comments with enough disclaimers to leave a T. rex wiggle room, even saying that he didn’t know the degree of human contribution, the crux of the debate. The mere mention of a human role (vs., presumably, a divine plan) was enough to bestir the guardians of scientific inquiry at Conservatives4Palin, who averred that Romney is “simpatico” with Obama and that he “totally bought into the man-made global warming hoax.”

Ah, yes, Romney the tree-hugging, flip-flopping Obamaphile. Isn’t he a Muslim, too?

On the issue of global warming, it is worth mentioning that the conservatives’ anti-global warming golden boy, Bjorn Lomborg, a Danish author, professor and environmental writer, has adjusted his thinking on the matter.

Although he has always maintained that cost-benefit analysis has to be part of any calculus in combating climate change, he also has said that global warming is “man-made and it is an important problem. But it is not the end of the world.”

In a saner world, we would not distrust those who change their mind but rather those who never do.

Share on Facebook

Share This

“He’s not bad, on purpose, he is just wrong. And when things get like they are, it can be very bad, if you are very wrong.” Mike Laub, 2011 (The most profound thing I have said all evening).

From http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/additional-issues

“President Obama and Vice President Biden are committed advocates for children. They will make sure that every child has health insurance, expand educational opportunities for low-income children, extend resources for low-income families, support and supplement our struggling foster care system, and protect children from violence and neglect.”

Who isn’t against violence towards children? They will make sure every child in the world has health insurance, or just America? The above paragraph is all I saw on the whole website, specifically dedicated to “child advocacy”. I didn’t see many specifics…


But should Obama “expand educational opportunities for low-income children? To many people, this is the most noble type of activity that a president could be engaged in. However, before stone me for daring to question something that seems so obviously beneficial, please consider the following:


The Federal Government shouldn’t duplicate services provided for by the states. When you have administrators in Federal, State, and County agencies all with the same responsibility you are wasting money. When you have administrators in Federal, State, and County agencies all with the same responsibility there is no accountability for the performance of any of the government agencies. When the federal government has a mission that is the same as more local governments, they often don’t really do anything besides set standards which the local agencies are not required to follow, and funnels money which they takes from individuals in each state, and put is back into other states. This whole process is overly complex, prone to corruption, bad incentives, inefficient with our money, and leads to bad results.


The Federal Government’s power should be more limited than the states.


If cities, counties, and states all have agencies working to expand educational opportunities for low-income children, then there is no reason for the Federal Government to duplicate these efforts.
There is no reason to have a Federal Department of Education, because no one from the Federal government teaches kids. All kids are taught by teachers who are employed by local jurisdictions. The Federal Government is worse at providing services than local governments. When the Federal Government gets involved in the same efforts as the states, it prevents us from learning which states are doing things the right way and which states are not running their programs correctly, because the duplicative efforts from the Federal Government make it more difficult to tell what is the cause of success or failure.

Share on Facebook

Share This

From http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/additional-issues:

“Our nation’s creativity has filled the world’s libraries, museums, recital halls, movie houses, and marketplaces with works of genius. The arts embody the American spirit of self-definition. As the author of two best-selling books —Dreams from My Father and The Audacity of Hope — President Obama uniquely appreciates the role and value of creative expression.”

This is all about trying to make artist like Obama. Romney, Cheney, and Bush also had best selling books! Does this also make them “uniquely” qualified?

Obama was wrong, in 2010 to spend $167.5 million on the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH)

1. Publicly financed art is too easily censored

2. The federal government is too broke to be spending money on the arts.

3. The arts in America get enough money from the private sector that they don’t need money from the federal government.

4. There is no jurisdiction in which Congress has authority to finance art exhibitions

5. The Federal Government should only fund things we are OK with putting people in Jail, if they wouldn’t want to pay their taxes for those things. For instance we can require people to pay their taxes to fund roads, because we all have to pay our share. But it would be wrong to put someone in Jail just because they didn’t want money to go to a particular project.

6. It doesn’t matter that it only costs a few dollars per citizen, because there are thousands of government programs that you could use this logic with, and they all add up after a while.

7. Vermont Arts Council Executive Director Alexander L. Aldrich said “ Every State SHOULD invest in the arts sector simply because it makes good economic sense”. Of course he as the State’s “ARTS COUNCIL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR” is going to say this, but it doesn’t make sense for us to just take the word of someone who’s job depends upon our agreeing with him because he obviously has a vested interest. Anything from him should be taken with a grain of salt, because his opinion is going to be highly biased. But lets set aside his bias, and look at what he said. He said: “Every State SHOULD invest in the arts sector simply because it makes good economic sense”. He didn’t specify which type of arts the states should invest in, he just said that all investment in “Every State SHOULD invest in the arts sector simply because it makes good economic sense”. So no matter how much money, or which type of art you invest in, it will make good economic sense. Quick! Stop the press! If this is true, we should spend 100% of Government’s money on the arts, because it is a “makes good economic sense”.

8. Government likes to call the money they spend “investments” but, we wouldn’t be in debt if all the money they spent was really an investment. Both parties call it an investment when they give money to people like them. The democrats call it investments when you spend money on piss-Christ, and the republicans call it an investment when you spend money on sports arenas and Nascar tracks. Both parties need to stop spending money that we don’t have, no matter how much they feel it will help. I would like to send all my kids to Harvard, and I can tell myself that I am investing in the future, and I can even convince myself to go into debt, and leverage myself so much so that I think It will all work out, but at some point if we don’t have the money we have got to stop spending it, no matter if you call it an investment or throwing money in a whole in the ground. We have got to stop doing it.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Go here for my Illinois site.

Share on Facebook

Share This

Reasons to agree:

1. Romney did a good job of extended jobless benefits, Romney did it while balancing the budget. (03-18-2003, Romney administration announces extended jobless benefits. , 06-11-2003, Romney extends “helping hand” to unemployed”).
2. Romney focused on Jobs more than Obama.  (06-24-2003, Romney embarks on a mission to create more jobs, 06-27-2003, Romney launches new web tool to attract jobs. 02-13-2003, Romney targets job growth through regional councils)
3. Romney was right to try to move jobs to Massachusetts, because if each Governor focused on making their states more competitive than our nation would be more competitive as a whole.
4. Within his first 3 months in office Romney created a web-based site finder to help businesses find available land for new research facilities, warehouses or factories. The site provided information from real estate developers, land owners and real estate brokers, combining site-specific data, including the location and size of the parcel, with Graphic Information Systems (GIS) technology to provide a unique resource to meet a company’s real estate needs. The site allowed users to be able to access demographic information about the Commonwealth’s unique regions. The site also helped businesses source financing as and had a “wizard” to enable small businesses to identify other resources needed to start and grow their businesses. Obama never did anything like this. (06-27-2003, Romney Launches New Web Tool To Attract Jobs)
5. Romney launched a multi-million dollar integrated marketing campaign entitled, “Massachusetts, It’s All Here,” to attract fast-growing industries to the Bay State. Obama never did anything like this with the USA. (06-27-2003, Romney Launches New Web Tool To Attract Jobs)
6. Romney met with business leaders to discuss Massachusetts jobs more often than Obama Met with business leaders to increase USA jobs. (06-27-2003, Romney Launches New Web Tool To Attract Jobs)

Mitt Romney’s Job Plan

Source: 08-06-2003 Press Release

In outlining his six-pronged TOPS program, Romney said government can play an important role in economic development by doing the following:

• Preserving a stable and competitive tax base;
• Holding down the cost of doing business in Massachusetts;
• Taming the high cost of housing by increasing the supply;
• Connecting our higher education system to regional workforce needs;
• Reforming state government to improve the delivery of services; and
• Working aggressively to bring more jobs to the state.

“In order to put Massachusetts back to work, the most important thing that government can do is to create the right environment for economic expansion and job growth. Employers will do the rest,” said Romney.

Quotes from Mitt Romney on Jobs:

1. “Ultimately, the only way for us to get the Commonwealth back on track is to find a job for every citizen who wants one,” said Romney, after a tour of Workforce Central Career Center, which is operated by the Division of Employment and Training in partnership with the Worcester City Manager’s Office of Employment and Training. “Extending the hours of operation for all of the One-Stops will help us achieve that goal – one person and one job at a time.” Source: 06-11-2003 Press Release
2. “I’m not going to rest until we put Massachusetts back to work,” said Romney, at a Logan Airport news conference announcing the “Jobs First” initiative. Taken from a 06-24-2003 Press Release
3. “I am thrilled about Cisco’s expansion in Massachusetts. As the state’s number one salesman, I am going to pursue companies up and down both coasts to encourage them to grow jobs in Massachusetts,” said Romney, attending the grand opening for the new Cisco facility. “This new site finder will add to our efforts to get the Massachusetts economy back on track.” Source: 06-27-2003 Press Release
4. “In the past, state government has had a poorly coordinated approach to identifying our strengths and weaknesses, and as a result, our public policy has been clumsy in terms of maximizing our overall growth potential,” said Romney. He added, “These Regional Competitiveness Councils will provide us with the information we need to boost regional growth and bring more jobs to the state.” Source: 02-13-2003 Press Releases
5. “I am committed to putting Massachusetts back to work,” Romney said. “As difficult as our challenges are, we have enormous potential – a diverse economy, a highly educated workforce and major academic and research institutions.” “But we can only be successful by working together, all of us, Democrats and Republicans, business and labor, to create an environment that allows job growth and development to take place,” he said. Source: 07-16-2003 Press Release
6. “I am committed to putting Massachusetts back to work,” Romney said. “Our goal with this clearinghouse is to increase the amount of credit allocation to Massachusetts organizations and projects, so we can begin to attract and direct resources to qualifying communities whose reinvestment is an important pathway to entrepreneurship, community life and above all, jobs.” Source: 07-24-2003 Press Release
7. “These grants are an investment in the future of our workforce. Learning does not begin and end in the classroom – it extends to the factory floor and the boardroom,” said Romney, who made the announcement at Micro Networks Corporation, which received a $128,198 grant. He added, “These grants, which will train people in management leadership, problem solving, high tech and manufacturing, are just one more way that the Commonwealth is working in partnership with the private sector to ensure more and better jobs for the future.” Source: 08-05-2003 Press Release
8. “This exciting and robust job expansion will reach cities and towns stretching from Fall River to Springfield,” said Romney. “Over the long-term it promises to provide a boost to both the state and local economies.” Source: 08-12-2003 Press Release
9. “You went through a tremendous evaluation process to decide where to consolidate the plant. You analyzed over 30 scenarios and considered many other states. In the end, you decided to stay here in Massachusetts and for that, I salute you,” Romney told company officials during a tour of the facility. Source: 09-23-2003 Press Release
10. “The core of our ‘Jobs First’ initiative is to ensure that every citizen who is in need of a job can get one,” said Romney. “To attract employers and encourage faster growth rates, the Administration has already commissioned the career centers to extend their hours, and now with the events across the state today, we are one step closer to making sure every person who is looking for a job is given the tools to find one.” Source: 09-04-2003 Press Release
11. “All across the Commonwealth, today and every day, the state’s 32 Career Centers are at the front line, providing hope and resources for job seekers such as Cheryl Tate,” said Romney. “I will not be satisfied until we get many more citizens back to work. Through the state’s one-stop career centers, we will work to accomplish this one person and one job at a time.” Source: 09-04-2003 Press Release
12. “The manufacturing facility that you opened today will begin Therion’s next stage of development: the move from research and development into the commercialization of vaccines,” Romney said. He added, “It is a tremendous breakthrough and you could not have chosen a better place to expand.” Source: 09-10-2003 Press Release
13. “Businesses start up and find a home in Massachusetts because of the opportunities our Commonwealth provides to workers and employers,” Romney said. “Our highly skilled workforce is one of our most competitive advantages and in order to maintain this workforce, we must continue to invest in our workers.” “When you think of cranberries, you think of Ocean Spray,” said Romney. “With this grant, workers will be trained to help the company continue to make high-quality cranberry products faster and more cost effectively. And more jobs will come to Southeastern Massachusetts.” Source: 10-17-2003 Press Release
14. “The HIT program is yet another tool we use to invest in our workforce and in our businesses,” said Romney. “Since its inception, the HIT program has succeeded in matching up out of work individuals with good jobs at companies that are looking to grow. We encourage even more businesses to take advantage of the program.” Source: 01-18-2005 Press Release
15. “People want a chance to work so they can build self-sustaining lives instead of relying on a welfare check that will keep them trapped in poverty,” said Romney. “By providing support services and incentives where necessary, we want to give welfare recipients the opportunity to achieve independent and fulfilling lives.” Source: 01-24-2005 Press Release
16. “The welfare policies that Massachusetts instituted in 1995 were ahead of their time. But, the times have changed and we now lag behind the rest of the nation,” said Romney. “To help welfare recipients change their lives for the better, we need to update our laws.” Source: 01-24-2005 Press Release
17. “The Citizens Job Bank will boost economic activity in Massachusetts and help companies grow and thrive,” said Romney. “Holding the line on taxes and maintaining a business-friendly environment are among our highest priorities to ensure that more people will be working.” Source: 02-03-2005 Press Release
18. “The businesses and the jobs that could potentially be created because of this important new law reflect our state’s greatest strength – brainpower,” said Romney. “That’s what we bring to the table and that’s what we need to nurture for future job growth and economic success.” Source: 02-04-2005 Press Release
19. “Our economy is on the move and we are creating thousands of new jobs, but we need to keep our foot on the gas pedal, said Romney. “I am asking the Legislature to join with me in making sure Massachusetts is competitive when it comes to businessgrowth and job creation.” Source: 03-03-2005 Press Release
20. “Bringing new jobs to Massachusetts is a top priority and the partnership with Citizens provides an innovative opportunity for businesses to tap into the state’s public and private resources,” said Romney. “In just two months, the job bank has added hundreds of jobs for our citizens and helped local businesses grow and thrive.” Source: 04-25-2005 Press Release
21. “These funds to train our workforce in cutting edge technologies and workforce efficiencies are absolutely critical to enhancing Massachusetts’ competitive edge,” said Romney, who announced the grants at Western Massachusetts Electric Company (WMECO), which received a $188,000 grant to train 310 employees. Source: 06-15-2005 Press Release
22. “Our challenge now is to start spreading the news. The manufacturing tax credit is good for cutting edge companies, good for job seekers and great for Massachusetts,” Romney said. Source: 08-08-2005 Press Release
23. “This is a no-brainer. If we make it difficult for businesses to grow, we’re not going to have growing businesses,” said Romney. “It’s time to reform the permitting process in Massachusetts so that we can add jobs and chop away at the red tape that keeps good employers from coming to the Commonwealth.” Source: 08-17-2005 Press Release
24. “We need to send a clear message to companies in Massachusetts that we want them to grow and add jobs here,” said Romney. “We can’t sit around while other states actively recruit our companies to move away. Aggressive marketing efforts will keep more jobs here and will attract companies that want to move to Massachusetts.” Source: 08-22-2005 Press Release
25. “A highly-skilled workforce enables our state to compete and thrive in the global economy, and these workforce training grants will help our companies stay on the cutting-edge,” Romney said during his announcement of the grants at Infinity Pharmaceuticals in Cambridge, one of the 73 grant recipients. Source: 11-09-2005 Press Release
26. “Businesses relocate and expand where they have access to well-trained and educated workers, and there is no better investment Massachusetts can make than to sharpen the skills of our employees,” Romney added. Source: 11-09-2005 Press Release

Jobs Related Romney Press Releases

2003

03-18-2003, ROMNEY ADMINISTRATION ANNOUNCES EXTENDED JOBLESS BENEFITS

06-11-2003, ROMNEY EXTENDS “HELPING HAND” TO UNEMPLOYED

06-24-2003, ROMNEY EMBARKS ON A MISSION TO CREATE MORE JOBS

06-27-2003, ROMNEY LAUNCHES NEW WEB TOOL TO ATTRACT JOBS

02-13-2003, ROMNEY TARGETS JOB GROWTH THROUGH REGIONAL COUNCILS

07-16-2003, WITH FOCUS ON ECONOMY, ROMNEY KICKS OFF “JOBS FIRST” FORUMS

07-24-2003, ROMNEY ANNOUNCES NEW JOBS INITIATIVE TO PROMOTE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REVITALIZATION

08-05-2003, ROMNEY AWARDS $3.3 MILLION IN WORKFORCE TRAINING FUNDS

08-06-2003, ROMNEY HOLDS SECOND “JOBS FIRST” FORUM

08-11-2003, ROMNEY HOLDS THIRD “JOBS FIRST” FORUM

08-12-2003, ROMNEY ANNOUNCES LIFE SCIENCES CLUSTER WILL CREATE 700 JOBS

09-30-2003, ROMNEY WELCOMES JETBLUE AIRWAYS TO LOGAN (PDF)

09-23-2003, ROMNEY CELEBRATES CONSOLIDATION OF ROCKLAND PLANT

09-15-2003, ROMNEY UNVEILS JOBS PACKAGE TO STRENGTHEN THE ECONOMY

09-04-2003, ROMNEY, HEALEY CELEBRATE “JOBS FIRST” DAY AT CAREER CENTERS

09-10-2003, ROMNEY FOCUSES ON BIOTECH AS ANOTHER COMPANY EXPANDS IN MASS

10-17-2003, ROMNEY HIGHLIGHTS IMPORTANCE OF TRAINING WORKERS

2004

2005

01-18-2005, ROMNEY TOUTS PROGRAM REWARDING COMPANIES FOR NEW JOBS

01-24-2005, WITH WORK, ROMNEY HELPS WELFARE RECIPIENTS GET ON THEIR FEET

02-03-2005, ROMNEY AND CITIZENS BANK ANNOUNCE JOB CREATION PROGRAM

02-04-2005, ROMNEY SIGNS BILL THAT SETS THE STAGE FOR JOB GROWTH

03-03-2005, WITH EMPLOYMENT ON THE RISE, ROMNEY STEPS UP JOBS EFFORT

04-11-2005, HEALEY RECOGNIZES THE CHARLES C. LEWIS COMPANY

04-25-2005, ROMNEY AND CITIZENS BANK TOUT NEW JOBS IN MASSACHUSETTS

06-15-2005, ROMNEY AWARDS $8.5 MILLION IN WORKFORCE TRAINING FUNDS

08-08-2005, ROMNEY ASKS COMPANIES TO SIGN UP FOR JOBS INCENTIVE PROGRAM

08-17-2005, IN WORCESTER, ROMNEY PUSHES PERMITTING REFORM TO CREATE JOBS

08-22-2005, ROMNEY PUSHES FOR STATE MARKETING TEAM TO HELP CREATE JOBS

11-09-2005, ROMNEY AWARDS $5 MILLION IN WORKFORCE TRAINING FUNDS

2006

02-13-2006, HEALEY AWARDS $6.5 MILLION IN WORKFORCE TRAINING GRANTS

Belief’s about Governor Mitt Romney and Jobs

Governor Mitt Romney is effective at creating an atmosphere that is conductive to Job [Growth.

Reasons to agree

1. As a CEO, business consultant, and investor he knew what it takes to get businesses to be succesful.
2. He changed the policy in Massachusetts so that the Career Center’s were open more hours.
3. He suppored workplace training.
4. He kept corporate taxes low, so they would want to stay in Massachusetts.
5. He talked up companies that movied into Massachusetts.
6. He is very pro business.
7. He removed Red tape.
8. He created Regional Competitiveness Councils.
9. He created a formal process for CEO’s to give the government feedback.
10. He rewarded companies that hired people that had been out of work for a while.
11. He created the Jobs First, “The HIT program”, and other programs.
12. He sent a clear message to companies in Massachusetts that he want them to grow and add jobs here. He will do the same thing in America.

This is a rough draft, help me out please.

http://myclob.pbwiki.com/Jobs

Exterior Links

1. https://sites.google.com/site/yeahneh/business–economy/jobs

Share on Facebook

Share This