RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Occupy Wall Street

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/17/banks-romney_n_1016274.html



Interesting how when the numbers favored Barack Obama in 2008 and for several years, liberals and the media perpetuated the myth that McCain was the Wall Street crony who was raking in all the cash, and curring favors in exchange.
Which is now proven completely false.
No one on the Left, yourself and Promod included, have ever acknowledged that Obama got way more in 2008 from corporate donors, and Wall Street in particular.

You also don't acknowledge the unprecedented level of corporate welfare and crony capitalism under Obama. And this is not historical discussion, this is ongoing Obama use of taxpayer dollars to favor corporations, to narrow competition and raise prices for the middle class and poor, that will continue as long as Obama remains in office. He's still trying to ram through another Stimulus bill (renamed with a deceitful focus-group-selected misnomer as a "Jobs Bill")

You imply that if Romney takes the money (which he has to, to get elected, because even with these donations, Obama's war-chest is expected to be a billion dollars or more), that if Romney takes money from Goldman Sachs or other firms, assume that he necessarily will act as corruptly and subserviently to corporate donors as Obama has.

But...

Romney, unlike Obama, was heavily involved in the financial industry and understands it.
Romney, unlike Obama, enters the campaign with a personal fortune of 300 million, and arguably cannot be bought, because he already is wealthy.
Romney, unlike Obama, is not in favor of a strong socialist central government. Unlike Obama, does not favor crony capitalism that would use corporations to advance an ideological socialist experiment. (as I sourced from Tim Carney's book OBAMANOMICS, that reliance on state-run capitalism results in greater market-share for the largest corporations, creating higher costs that drive out smaller competitors, and results in less competition and higher production cost, resulting in higher prices for everyone, most impacting middle class and poor consumers.)

Why do you assume that a free-market guy like Romney would enact the same kind of corporate free-for all that Obama did? When Romney is a free-market guy, and Obama is a central-planning guy?

Obama's 2008 level of Wallstreet and other corporate donors --where even the New York Times reported that Obama was out-spending McCain an average of 4-to-1 nationwide, and even 8-to-1 or higher in some highly contested areas-- went virtually unreported.
Yet you are quick to make snap assumptions about Romney, whose donations and ideology are less incriminating than Obama's were in 2008-2010.