Romney Pays Surprise Visit to his Money in the Caymans
No Timetable for Withdrawal, Says Presumptive Nominee
CAYMAN ISLANDS (The Borowitz Report) – In an uncharacteristically emotional scene for the presumptive GOP nominee, Mitt Romney today paid a surprise visit to his money in the Cayman Islands.
Speaking in a bank vault surrounded by stacks of cash, Mr. Romney praised his money for “the brave work you have done in the never-ending fight for freedom from Federal income tax.”
“Thanks to your hard work, losers around the world are envious of me,” he added. ”For that I salute you.”
Stressing that his money’s mission in the Caymans was “far from over,” he refused to set any timetable for withdrawal.
In a reference to his bid for the Presidency, Mr. Romney told his money, “It would be an honor and a privilege to have my face on you someday.”
After plunging into the stacks of cash to touch many of the dollar bills individually, Mr. Romney boarded his private jet to pay a surprise visit to Switzerland.
(h/t Borowitz report, via DiOhso)
He’s also (apparently) going to come to London for the opening day of the Olympics. (And, reading between the lines, negotiating for a ‘statesman’ photo op at No 10.) Ho-hum.
Chances of a photo-op at No10 btw are probably minimal. He’s a candidate in an election: so all he can hope for is a ‘private meeting’. Maybe he’ll get to meet Cleggy. He ain’t gonna get a hug from HM backstage on the opening night, that’s for sure.
But, since it seems the US TV media are decamping to London wholesale for the summer, maybe his campaign is just thinking “follow the cameras’? ‘ “Ever since the games in Salt Lake City in 2002, the Olympics has been a big part of my life,” he told a radio station in Columbus, Ohio last month.’
Be that as it may, Squirrel, of course, is agog with excitement and will obviously be one of the thousands and thousands of eager Londoners lining the road as Mittens jogs by on his way from Heathrow to Stratford clutching a flaming copy of the statue of liberty.
Hey squirrel, I’d be interested to hear about the on-the-ground preps for the games. I saw that about missiles on people’s roofs, ffs. Bizarre.
If you come across anything oddball, if you could link to it so I can write it up I’d be grateful. Or, for that matter, personal anecdotes.
You could link via email, or in comments, or you could write it up yourself if you want, and publish it here as yourself. Nor would you be restricted to the games—you throw a pretty wide net, it could be a hoot.
Think about it, at least.
I’ll think about it . . .but sadly, the squirrel spine is giving me gyp, so I’m not feeling very bright just at the moment. Just got an appointment today to talk with my surgeon again in six weeks.
That missile thing . . .yes, it did look bizarre, and I don’t know what to make of it, really. It’s something that’d been mooted months back, I think something the guys from your side of the Atlantic were beefing about. I can’t help but suspect it’s a bit of a show. Bit of a storm in a teacup, possibly; that one can’t have been the only possible site, but it happened to be the home of a journo and a gated community (i.e. posh) as well. . .
Supposedly, they’re basing jets not far out at Northolt to fly over London at need; apparently, there were supposed to be practice runs this week but I haven’t heard any rocketing low over my roof, and I’m on the route, I should think: the ceremonial flyovers to Buck House come and go over my bit of London.
Might be out of London and in France when the Olympics actually begin (rather depends on when my surgeon intends to do his next bit of fiddling with my spine, and how much) but I’ll be around for the Jubilee. I’d rather fancied watching the opening on a big screen in Hyde Park or whatever, but I’ll see British TV on satellite in France.
So far all is pretty quiet and normal as far as I can tell. Only thing we’ve noticed so far is new CCTV cameras along Portobello Road. (I presume because it’s been busier than ever with tourists this last eighteen months, and too crowded a lot of the time for our usual weekend pair of mounted police/pickpocket watchers to get through. The horses must really be missing their free carrots. And I suppose the council and the Met expect it to be even more crowded this summer with the Jubilee, the Olympics and Carnival one after the other.)
There is, however, going to be a waterborne opera of The Owl and The Pussycat (RoH, written by Terry Jones!) touring the canals, which I definitely don’t want to miss.
Squirell:
Sincerely hope it’ll go well for you.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens when Romney gets here vis a vis Cameron.
There was a piece in yesterday’s Guardian about Cameron having put his foot in it during his recent visit to Obama by being – in Romney’s advisor’s opinion – too gushing when he toasted the President. Evidently, it’s not the done thing for a foreign dignitary to be too partisan during a US election year.
To be fair to Cameron, much as I loathe him and his continual lies and everything he represents, says and desires -and all his friends too- British elections last all of six weeks. In British terms Obama isn’t anywhere near the election.
Also, creepy and mendacious and clueless as he is, Cameron isn’t without a certain amount of cunning. As a pol, who is he going to want to be associated with, for his own benefit, Obama or any one of the Republicans, least of all Romney?
Getting his picture in the paper with Obama gets him votes here. Getting his picture in the paper with Romney either does him no good at all, or, more likely, harms him.
I thought it was a bit early for Romney’s camp to be getting antsy, especially when Cameron, despite his many trips abroad, doesn’t even feature in the world list of influential politicians.
Sorry should have added: Or influential anyone actually!
Off topic, but I’m listening to a discussion of the John Edwards trial. Edwards is definitely sleazy but having an affair and upsetting one’s wife is not a crime and I don’t understand why testimony about Elizabeth Edwards’ reaction to the affair is allowed. What bearing does it have on whether campaign finance laws were broken?
A lawyer who specializes in campaign finance law was saying that the laws are so murky that it’s difficult enough for lawyers and politicians to understand them and that there’s no way 12 people off the street are going to grasp the intricacies in the course of a trial. If Edwards is convicted, it’ll probably be because the jury decides he was a scumbag of a husband. As someone on NPR just said, he’s a cad but probably not a criminal. In my book that’s a miscarriage of justice. But nothing new.
I thought that was more than a bit petulant of Mittens. He didn’t come off well on that one. Unless it’s just more entitlement – hey, a conservative minister is supposed to be on my team. I somehow think that they might actually get alone anyway in the flesh. I think Clegg is more in Obama’s ball park ideologically.
Di -
You may not think Dave is that influential but, in theory anyway, the UK is supposed to be our best bud. I doubt Iraq would have happened without the UK. (As Tony tries to suck up to the British public. Good luck with that. I dunno if Bush would have the stones to try that one.)
Di-Ohso : Granted.
The silliest part of all that, I thought, was that Cameron’s PR visit to Obama was back in March, and it’s only now the Romney software programmers seem to have thought they could make something of it. Since it’s doubtful if many Americans know (and I doubt if any at all care) who Cameron is, as a piece of Obama-bashing, it seems entirely pointless.
Unless the Romney-bot programmers think it’s a bit of blackmail they can use to get the Brits to introduce it to some of the really important people who’ll be at the Olympic opening ceremony.
(A Squirrel thought on something else here, if anyone cares.)
Madame -
“I don’t understand why testimony about Elizabeth Edwards’ reaction to the affair is allowed. What bearing does it have on whether campaign finance laws were broken?”
Maybe because it showed why he felt he had to accept donations instead of using his own money, to hide it from her.
Otherwise i basically agree with you. Sleazy, but doesn’t really seem like a crime.
Just now trying to catch up a bit with the Philly priest trial.
And back to the topic at hand – fuck me. Ng Mk. II is probably pasting this all over CiF as we speak.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/06/magazine/romneys-former-bain-partner-makes-a-case-for-inequality.html
Pornstar:
I checked this, wondering if I was out of date, but according to a 2011 Congressional Research Report, Britain is still the largest foreign investor in the USA, China, and all the fuss about it ‘owning’ the USA notwithstanding.
I think we still own more of your debt than the Chinese, too.
(Just don’t tell the Republicans. Or they’ll be dusting off that old plan to rerun the War of 1812* again.)
*Please note: we are not making a fuss this year about the 200th anniversary of winning that one, just in case it gives the Repugs and the Tea Party any ideas.
Pornstar: Ugh.
Only glanced at the first page, but I see that one of his arguments appear so be that. for example, ‘investing’ in the ‘innovation’ of collecting chicken shit and moulted feathers from factory farms and feeding it to cows makes fast-food chain beefburgers cheaper so American consumers whose wages haven’t increased in forty years feel as though they’re still as well off now, or have the illusion they’re better off, as they were then?
Christ, if people believe that . . .
Madame – on an earlier thread about CU and donor disclosure I tried to look up the actual rules and boy were they murky. Still don’t know how it works.
Obviously written by poliicians who want to be seen to be doing something while keeping their protection racket on businesses and individuals rolling along
Squirrel -
Britain is still the largest foreign investor in the USA, China, and all the fuss about it ‘owning’ the USA notwithstanding.
I think we still own more of your debt than the Chinese, too
I think is you substitute “queen” for “Britain” and “we” above, you’d be more on the money. Cme across a lot of stuff awhile ago – probably from CiF links. Quite the old sleazebag, (Vicky too for that matter), she would put Bain to shame.
Expat -
Something like that.
Squirrel just voted. Just for the amusement of our American friends, using, of course, the latest hanging-chad-free voting technology.
That is ca. 1870: three pieces of A4 paper and a blunt pencil.
(Oh, and since I forgot my polling card, all I had to do was give my name and address, they checked it against the electoral register, and that was that. No ID required.)
I’m beginning to understand how the Tories got in.
Squirrel I voted too. If scores of millions can vote on sheets of paper with reasonable accuracy and efficiency (I know the numbers were way down this election, but even in bumper years it works) then so can hundreds. Seems to me the things that are most important when it comes to counting votes is that a.) they should never all be counted in one place, and b.) there should be a paper trail that can be physically re-counted, by different hands. Computer voting is just begging for vote rigging in general, and effective vote rigging in particular. One rotten apple can rig a computer tallied election. To rig a paper ballot counted by hand election takes a lot more rotten apples a lot better organized.
Weird result of the elections here? The Tories got a bloody nose and their first and strongest knee-jerk excuse seems to be: we should have come out hard against gay marriage and immigration!
In other words we should have hated the other more, conjured up more bogey men, stirred up more hatred and fear!
Scratch a wounded Tory, find a fascist….
There was a low turnout.
According to the experts, a high turnout favours Labour, and when it’s low the Conservatives do better.
There’s no doubt yesterday was a protest vote but I doubt the Cons will listen. They seem to be blaming everyone and their brother for their drubbing.
LibDems have taken a pasting for the second year in a row. The writing is on the wall for them I think. Serves them right!
I wonder how things will stand three years down the road?
Bluth, there are a few things anybody can cook: mac and cheese from a box, ramen, and a paper ballot election. The first two are as boring as watching sheep think, but the last is an awe-inspiring thing to watch when it’s done right. Completely restores your faith in human ingenuity.
Agree with you about computers, though. They could be made mostly idiot-proof but nobody is going to spend that kind of money. As it is, they’re unbelievably fragile. They’ll fail all by themselves a thousand times (and probably do) for every one somebody games.
Nat
I remember -vividly- your description of ballot rigging in Chicago. I witnessed some pretty staggering ingenuity along those lines myself, in N.C., back in the day. (in that time and place all done by Dems of course -there were hardly Republicans to speak of, and still they rigged the vote. I assume because they were getting paid by the gross?).
But what you described, and what I witnessed, took a lot of effort for… not that may extra votes per man hour of nefarious underhanded brilliance. But once it’s all done in the ether, who the fuck knows if the count is clean or sort of clean or pretty damn dirty or pure invention? And where is the balance? If it’s a paper count you can probably bet that a lot of the time in most places underhanded nefarious brilliance on both sides will more or less cancel each other out. With computers it’s always going to be whoever gets in last and/or nearest to the point of delivery.
As I like to point out early and often, one of the main reasons for the electoral college was to insure that all the votes would never be counted in one place.
Bluth,
Sure, but all that vote-stealing ingenuity evolved from prior attempts to contain vote-stealing. Once we just “stuffed” ballot boxes, so effective defenses were implemented. Then we let our side’s votes be honest but tore up the other side’s, so Organized Virtue had to find ways around that. And we were always up to the challenge. By the time we were through, ballots got counted over and over again, at many different levels and often by Organized Virtue itself, but once they left the polling place, they always said the same thing.
You could make an auditable computerized system that recorded votes at many levels simultaneously and produced a tamper-proof paper trail at the source, one that the voter herself could verify as she voted. It’s done every day in all kinds of businesses. But it would require spending money that isn’t being spent today, and would also require state-level control, i.e. a few hundred IT drones in even the smallest states dictating to local election boards. Go ahead and tell me that’s in anybody’s deck of cards.
MadameMax, it had something to do with proving he was using the money illegally for his campaign. That’s what they were saying on Canadian news.
Had thoughts . . .but Di-Ohso’s Torygraph post seems the more appropriate place?
3″ long blunt pencils at that if I remember.
Of course hanging chads are allegedly the result of stuffers being unable to effectively punch through stacks of papers – or of course little old arthritic ladies being unable to punch through one.