Part of the Bay Area News Group

Romney finishes his tough week here in Bay Area

By Josh Richman
Friday, September 21st, 2012 at 10:51 am in 2012 presidential election, campaign finance, Mitt Romney.

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney arrives in the Bay Area today for a high-priced fundraiser on the Peninsula, but only those paying to get in will know what he says there – no press will be allowed.

Unless, of course, someone surreptitiously videotapes this evening’s event at the Strawberry Hill estate on Redington Road in Hillsborough, as someone did a similar event this past May in Florida. That video, released this week by Mother Jones, included Romney’s now-notorious comments about roughly half the country:

“There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.”
[snip]
“[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

Should guests at this fundraiser be frisked at the door for recording devices?

Anyway, tickets to tonight’s event cost $500 for young professionals, $1,000 for bronze level, $2,500 for silver level and $5,000 for gold level. Giving $15,000 gets two tickets to the reception as well as a photo for two with Romney, as does bundling $25,000 to $50,000.

Giving $50,000 gets four tickets, including two with preferred seating at a special reception, and four photo reception tickets; bundling $100,000 gets four tickets, two special reception tickets and two photo reception tickets; and a couple that gives $100,000 gets four tickets, two special reception tickets and four photo reception tickets.

Musician David Foster will entertain the crowd. The event is to start at 4:45 p.m., but Romney isn’t scheduled to arrive at San Francisco International Airport until shortly before 6 p.m.

The fundraiser is for Romney Victory Inc., a joint fundraising committee including Romney’s campaign, the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee and the state GOP entities in Idaho, Massachusetts, Oklahoma and Vermont.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • JAFO

    President BO lost four Americans in an undefended consulate, including our ambassador, sent his UN Ambassador flak on the Sunday morning tour to claim that the Libiyan terrorst attack was simply a spontaneous anti-video street demonstration; later acknowledged that it was indeed a terrorist attack; fiddled as the Middle East erupted in post-Arab Spring, anti-American flames; saw the publication of a scathing report on his Department of Justice’s handling of the Mexican gun running “Fast and Furious” fiasco which led to the departure of two highly placed DOJ officials; tried to explain that his now well documented love of “income redistribution” does not make him a Socialist; and, your headline trumpets that Romney had a “tough week.” Can we look forward to an equally balanced report on Obama’s week? Oh, he did appear on “The Letterman Show.” I guess that’s something to be proud of.

  • JohnW

    Re: 1 JAFO Says:

    Wow. This calls for rebuttal.

    “President BO lost four Americans.” Do you really want to go there?

    By your logic, Reagan” lost” 241 people in the Lebanon Marine barracks attack. And Bush lost nearly 3,000 on 9/11, both due to security failures.

    “Fiddled as the Middle East erupted in post-Arab Spring, anti-American flames.” You seem to have some intervention in mind that would have avoided the post-Arab Spring turmoil — most of which has been internal conflict, not anti-American except for the recent events. And the nature of that intervention would have been what in a JAFO administration?

    As for redistribution, you presumably are referencing the 1998 comments Obama made, during which he talked about pooling and redistributing resources (that’s what taxes do) — something we have always done for everything from building roads, to sending men to the Moon, to establishing schools, police and fire departments and, yes, providing safety nets. When you get a mortgage interest subsidy, that’s “redistribution,” no different than if the government sent you a check for the amount of the tax savings value of the deduction. When we did tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 that were 100% financed with debt, that’s “redistribution.”

    Since Fox News left out half the Obama 1998 recording, here’s the rest: “How do we pool resources at the same time as we decentralize delivery systems in ways that both foster competition, can work in the marketplace, and can foster innovation at the local level and can be tailored to particular communities?” Wow. “Decentralization,” “competition,” “marketplace,” “innovation,” “local.” That’s positively Bolshevik smack talk.

    You have a point about trumpeting Romney’s tough week. Who’s doing that? Peggy Noonan, Joe Scarborough, Wall Street Journal editorial page, Bill Kristol,
    GOP Senate candidates in Virginia, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Connecticut, Massachusetts…Damn those liberals!

    What was that the WSJ said in the conclusion of it’s editorial? “Surely a man as smart as the former CEO o Bain Capital can give a better speech on taxes and dependency than he delivered at the fundraiser. If he can’t, he’ll lose, and he’ll deserve to.” Damn liberal press!

  • JAFO

    @ #2 JohnW

    Your full-throated defense of President BO notwithstanding, I think you missed my central point. I accept responsibility for making an overly nuanced presentation.

    I’m primarily interested in the subtle bias too often shown by headline writers and/or reporters when they make their postings. This post is a good example. The post presents facts to be sure, but they’re generously sprinkled with opinion. Readers are not provided any context or perspective. Arguably, Romney did have a tough week, a tough media week, lead in large measure by reporters and news outlets that have a well-documented investment in this president’s success. Their selection of stories, headlines, facts, placement, presentation tone, etc. is key to supporting an ongoing narrative; and, the liberal echo chamber is deafening.

    When Josh selectively decides to imply that only Romney had a “tough week;” when he goes on to label Romney’s comments as “now-notorius;” when he snarkily asks whether guests at an upcoming Romney fund raiser will be frisked in search of recording devices; when he breathlessly reports that media are not invited to this event without also reporting that similar limits are routinely placed on the press at most Obama fundraisers and also leaves out the fact that reporters were invited to attend two recent major Romney fundraisers, he betrays a subtle, heck unsubtle, bias.

    Of course, his defense will be that blogs are opinion sites rather than news sites. Fair enough. It’s left to readers then to determine to what extent he, as well as his editors, are successful in preventing their opinions and bias from leaking into their straight news stories.

  • Josh Richman

    @#3: Who had the tougher week? Watch, and keep watching, the trend lines in the polls, particularly in battleground states.

    The comments are “now-notorious” – they’ve been trumpeted by just about every media outlet in the country, and panned by a lot of pundits from across the political spectrum.

    Snarky? Yes, guilty. Plenty of snark here to go around.

    I’ve taken the Obama campaign to task in the past for excluding media from fundraisers, and I myself covered – on this very blog – one of the two Romney fundraisers to which you refer; the Chron’s Carla Marinucci pooled the other one, and I posted her report, too.

  • JohnW

    Re: #3 JAFO

    I get your point. But the standards of objectivity for blogs are inherently different than for regular news outlets — where there is a systematic editorial management process for how stories are selected and reported. When I come to this blog, I do so to read other people’s biases and express my own. To an extent, it’s a form of entertainment and mental jujitsu.

    For objective reporting and intelligent analysis, I rely on multiple respected printed and online newspapers (including the sponsor of this blog) and a few respected TV news sources. Even then, there is no such thing as 100% objective or unbiased reporting, because humans are involved. But there is a big difference between intentionally slanted, agenda-driven bias (Fox News, MSNBC) and subtle, unintentional bias (real or imagined) that might be detected in reporting elsewhere.

    My comments at #2 were not a defense of Obama per se, although I am fully capable of and often motivated to do that. Mainly, it was a response to the “President BO lost four Americans” comment. I thought that was pretty much below the belt and as ill-timed as Romney’s response to the tragedy.

  • JAFO

    Re: #5 JohnW

    No low blow here. A retired career Navy friend of mine once told me that when the ship runs aground, even when the captain is asleep in his quarters, he’s held to account. Harry Truman famously and bravely subscribed to the theory that the buck stopped on his desk. So it does for President’s Obama, Reagan and Bush. The aforementioned tragic incidents happened on their watches. As for Romney’s purportedly “ill-timed” and “inaccurate” comment; call it dumb luck, but the Obama administration’s explanation revisions are sounding more like Romney’s initial comment and analysis with each passing day.

  • JohnW

    JAFO, the way I look at it, WE lost four Americans that day. WE, not Reagan, lost 241 soldiers, sailors and marines in the attack on the barracks in Lebanon. WE, not Bush, lost nearly 3,000 in the 9/11 attacks.

    Yes, those events happened “on their watch.” But, in the days immediately following 9/11, I don’t recall any snarky comments like “Bush lost 3,000 Americans.”

    We will discover all the facts about the attack on the Benghazi consulate, including any intelligence or security lapses, just as we did in those other tragedies. I’m pretty sure the analysis will not be “Obama lost four Americans.” We will learn from any mistakes and make adjustments accordingly, as we always do.

    As for your ship aground analogy, we did have the carrier Enterprise run aground while entering San Francisco Bay in 1983. Nobody said, “Reagan ran a ship aground.” Yes, the Navy, and the captain himself, viewed the commander as responsible. It didn’t just happen “on his watch.” It happened while he was aboard and in command of the ship. He also became commander of the Pacific Fleet and and Vice Chief of Staff of the Navy.

  • Elwood

    ” We will learn from any mistakes and make adjustments accordingly, as we always do.”

    The first thing we should do is find a very large bus and throw Hillary under it.

    And then find another one for Holder, the most incompetent and corrupt AG in history.

  • JAFO

    After reviewing this thread, I have to apologize. I confess that I fell victim to the irresistible temptation that several other readings of this blog have, namely, assuming that “scintillating” back and forth between two readers is interesting to other readers. I suspect that’s not the case. When I witness such tit for tat on other subjects, I struggle to not doze off. I fear that many readers have been napping during my recent exchange with JohnW. Well, this is their wake-up call. Time to move on. I for one will try to limit my give and take in the future. I know there are many other readers who would love to get a word in edge wise.

  • JohnW

    Re: #8

    Already ramping up the 2016 anti-Hillary campaign, are we?

    Holder, “the most incompetent and corrupt AG in history:

    You speak of the man who was appointed D.C. Superior Court judge by Ronald Reagan. You won’t be surprised that I don’t entirely agree with your view of Holder.

    Lest you think I lack objectivity, some of the best AG’s have been Republicans: Brownell and Rogers under IKE and Thornburgh under Reagan/Bush.

    But so have some of the worst: John Mitchell (only one to go to prison); Robert Bork (Saturday Night Massacre); Ed Meese (resigned for role in Wedtech scandal; and Alberto Gonzalez (’nuff said).

    On the Dem side: Good ones: RFK (speaks well for nepotism); Nick Katzenbach and Ramsey Clark (good as AG; far lefty afterwards). Bad ones (two of Woodrow Wilson’s three AG’s (racist, anti-semitic, corrupt, real stinkers).

    I would call Holder undistinguished and a mixed bag. Not the heavy hitter I would have hoped for Obama to appoint. There were many far better choices. But corrupt? I don’t agree. He enabled the Marc Rich pardon, but that was before he was AG. On the other hand, he played a key roll in the Justice department in putting Dan Rostenkowski behind bars and in prosecuting the Congressional post office scandal.

    Anyway, Holder is leaving in January, whether Obama wins or loses. If Obama wins — Kamala Harris or Jennifer Granholm. I would hope for the latter.

  • Elwood

    “But corrupt? I don’t agree.”

    Fast and Furious

    New Black Panther Party

    But maybe you’re right, John. It’s difficult to say whether some of his actions are corrupt or simply incompetent.

  • Elwood

    Just for the hell of it, Robert Bork was ACTING Attorney General for a little less than two months.

  • JohnW

    Re: 12

    Very true. An ACTING AG whose AG-ship is known for one particular ACT.

  • JohnW

    Just read a story about a Zogby (JZ Analytics) poll showing Obama with a surprising seven point (49-42%) lead among NASCAR fans.

    In the same poll, Romney had a 7 point lead among born again Christians and a slim lead among Wal-Mart shoppers.

    I kid you not! They actually do polls on this stuff.

  • Truthclubber

    Since Twit Romney has such a penchant for singing (off-key, no less), here’s a little riff on a song that he can break out into song any time now:

    “Oh, the states dwindle down, to a precious few.

    Virginia, North Carolina.

    And it’s a long, long way, to get elected, and I’ll be damned, if I get there…”

    What I said several MONTHS ago still stands:

    NOT.
    GONNA.
    BE.
    CLOSE.

    Take it to the InTrade bank.

  • Truthclubber

    “This blog is alive, with the sound of…crickets!”

    (To my latest post.)

  • Truthclubber

    The Neo-Fascism party, aka “the current version of the Republican Party”, strikes (or attempts to strike) again!

    No matter, O’bammy the Hafrican will win again.

    In a landslide.

    The only question left (since the US Senate will remain in Democratic control for 2013) is whether Twit Romney and Paul Lyin will so alienate plain folks that they will allow the Democrats to retake the US House — stay tuned.