After Voting To Repeal Obamacare, Republicans Turn Their Attention To Golf

Romney Surrogate Praises Obama Initiatives For Reducing CO2, Says Romney Is ‘Not A Denier’ Of Climate Change

THINK PROGRESS

Maybe it’s the record heat we just experienced in Washington, but I am very confused.

Since last summer, GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney has been saying that “we don’t know” if humans are causing climate change — flipping in the opposite direction from his earlier position as Governor, when he called for a “no regrets policy” on addressing climate change.

But as we head into the general election, a surrogate from the Romney campaign now indicates the candidate has again changed his stance, declaring that he is “certainly not a denier” of climate science.

Speaking at a debate on energy issues today between representatives of the Romney and Obama campaigns, former Deputy Secretary of Energy Linda Gillespie Stunz implied multiple times that Mitt Romney would be open to action on the issue.

Stunz mostly danced around the questions on climate, criticizing EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions and dismissing any domestic action without more international coordination. But in providing her answers, she also strongly hinted that a Romney Administration would engage in international talks on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

“It’s a huge challenge. But it’s one that Governor Romney would face up to by continuing dialogues … with other countries. This is not a problem that can be addressed by the U.S. alone,” said Stunz, speaking at an event put together this morning by the Business Roundtable.

She was debating Dan Reicher, former assistant secretary for energy efficiency and renewable energy, who spoke on behalf of the Obama campaign.

Stunz also said there “needs to be more research on adaptation. He’s certainly not a denier, he certainly thinks there’s more room for research.”

Stunz’s comments mark a noticeable shift in rhetoric that potentially complicates the Romney campaign’s messaging. Now that a representative for the campaign is back on record claiming (in a round-about way) that Romney believes climate change is an issue that needs to be addressed, does that now mean he will begin talking about it during the general election?

Up until now, Romney has been focused exclusively on appealing to voters on the extreme right — and in the process turned his back on previous support for efficiency, renewable energy, and reducing carbon emissions.

But with polls showing that that a large majority of Americans understand that climate change is accelerating, support government action on the issue, and strongly desire more renewable energy, the Romney campaign may be faced with another decision: Should the candidate flip back to a more moderate stance?

They may need to bring out the Etch A Sketch on this one.

We’ve come to expect changes like this from Romney, a candidate who has drastically altered his position on virtually every issue. But it’s one of Stunz’s other comments that really has me confused.

In describing appropriate ways to limit carbon emissions, she said Romney believes that initiatives already in place — things like fuel economy standards, appliance standards, and efficiency targets — are the solution to lowering carbon emissions.

“We are effectively de-carbonizing our economy in ways that we had not foreseen,” said Stunz, referencing measures undertaking by the Obama administration.

Wait a second. Didn’t Romney say last December that he would roll back existing fuel economy standards? And don’t I also remember him falsely claiming that new light bulb efficiency standards meant the government had “banned” incandescent lights?

So which is it?

Romney’s campaign has twisted itself into knots on the issue of climate change, and it’s unclear where the candidate will stand when he’s finally untied himself.

Many Wall Street executives say wrongdoing is necessary: survey

(Reuters) - If the ancient Greek philosopher Diogenes were to go out with his lantern in search of an honest many today, a survey of Wall Street executives on workplace conduct suggests he might have to look elsewhere.

A quarter of Wall Street executives see wrongdoing as a key to success, according to a survey by whistleblower law firm Labaton Sucharow released on Tuesday.

In a survey of 500 senior executives in the United States and the UK, 26 percent of respondents said they had observed or had firsthand knowledge of wrongdoing in the workplace, while 24 percent said they believed financial services professionals may need to engage in unethical or illegal conduct to be successful.

Sixteen percent of respondents said they would commit insider trading if they could get away with it, according to Labaton Sucharow. And 30 percent said their compensation plans created pressure to compromise ethical standards or violate the law.

"When misconduct is common and accepted by financial services professionals, the integrity of our entire financial system is at risk," Jordan Thomas, partner and chair of Labaton Sucharow's whistleblower representation practice, said in a statement.

The survey's release comes as the fallout from Barclays PLC's (LSE:BARC.L - News) Libor-rigging scandal continues and other banks including Citigroup Inc (NYSE:C - News), HSBC Holdings PLC (LSE:HSBA.L - News), Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC (LSE:RBS.L - News) and UBS AG (VTX:UBSN.VX - News) await the outcome of an industry-wide probe.

(Reporting By Lauren Tara LaCapra; Editing by Leslie Adler)

SF Tesla Society Patrick Flanagan

Five more corporations distance themselves from ALEC

RAW STORY

Five corporations recently announced they were no longer members of the American Legislative Exchange Council after being confronted by liberal and progressive groups.

John Deere, CVS Caremark, MillerCoors, HP, and Best Buy all said they would stop funding the organization, which drafts model legislation for state lawmakers and describes itself as “policy making program that unites members of the public and private sectors in a dynamic partnership.”

ALEC received little scrutiny until recently, when organizations like ColorOfChange, Common Cause, People for the American Way, Progress Now, the Center for Media and Democracy, CREDO Action and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee began a campaign targeting the organization’s corporate sponsors — who pay tens of thousands of dollars every year to be members..................

Mrs. Betty Bowers - Cooking with Christ

A cooking show with America's Best Christian, Mrs. Betty Bowers. Betty shows that, with enough servants, even the laziest homemaker can serve up a yummy recipe that teaches children all about the gruesome, bloody death of Jesus. Bon appétit!

Mr. Romney’s Financial Black Hole

NYT

Paying taxes forthrightly has long been a matter of civic pride for most American politicians, a demonstration of honesty and of a willingness to share in society’s burdens. Since the Watergate era, presidential candidates have released several years of tax returns, allowing voters to peer at their financial choices and discern their entanglements.

Mitt Romney has upended that tradition this year. He has released only one complete tax return, for 2010, along with an unfinished estimate of his 2011 taxes. What information he did release provides a fuzzy glimpse at a concerted effort to park much of his wealth in overseas tax shelters, suggesting a widespread pattern of tax avoidance unlike that of any previous candidate.

Mr. Romney has resisted all demands for more disclosure, leading to growing criticism from Democrats that he is trying to hide his fortune and his tax schemes from the public. Given the troubling suspicions about his finances, he needs to release many more returns and quickly open his books to full scrutiny.

The 2010 tax return showed that the blind trust held by his wife, Ann, included a $3 million Swiss bank account that had not been properly reported on previous financial disclosure statements. (The account was closed by the trust manager in 2010 who feared it might become embarrassing for the campaign. He was right.) It also showed that Mr. Romney had used a complex offshore tax shelter, known as a blocker corporation, to shield the investments in his I.R.A. from paying an obscure business tax.

The use of that technique by wealthy taxpayers and institutions, long been blasted by Congressional tax experts as abusive, costs the treasury $1 billion a decade.

The return showed at least 20 investments not previously listed on disclosure reports, but it did not provide enough information to evaluate their size or holdings. Neither the tax return nor other disclosures have revealed the full amounts of the Romneys’ other offshore holdings over the years, including investments in Germany, Luxembourg, the Cayman Islands, Australia and Ireland.

Recent articles by The Associated Press and Vanity Fair focused on a Bermuda account that Mr. Romney transferred to his wife’s blind trust the day before he was inaugurated as governor of Massachusetts in 2003. The account, created in 1997, had not been properly disclosed to voters until January. Even though it had few assets in 2010, according to the return, it could have sheltered a significant amount of income last year or in previous years.

Mr. Romney also has not fully explained the nature of his separation agreement with Bain Capital, the private-equity firm he founded, which he left in 1999. Last month, his trust reported receiving a $2 million payment from Bain as part of unpaid earnings from his work there. Of the 138 Bain funds organized in the Cayman Islands, Mr. Romney has interests in 12, worth up to $30 million, according to Vanity Fair.

Though the Romney campaign has often distanced itself from Bain’s recent corporate takeover work, voters have no way of knowing how much the candidate has received from Bain since he left, or how much is coming.

Firms like Bain park money in the Caymans because the islands have no taxes on capital gains, profits or income for foreigners. But just because it’s legal doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do.

The campaign says Mr. Romney has received no tax benefits from his offshore shelters, a dubious assertion but one impossible to check without more disclosure. Mr. Romney said this week that he had no idea where the blind trust had put his money, and he dismissed the issue of the offshore investments, saying they were no more consequential than investing in a foreign car company.

A foreign investment, however, is not the same as an offshore tax shelter. A more conscientious politician would have urged his blind trusts to have nothing to do with shelters not available to the general public. And Mr. Romney is tarnishing an important political tradition — one set by his father, George Romney, who released 12 years of tax returns in 1967 — by continuing to keep the sources of his income in the shadows.

Was Obama A CIA Spy In Pakistan? ‘Maybe,’ Say Confusing School Records

OK, so the Wonkville experiment has been up and running for a day, and let’s check out the hot tips … wait, Obama was a Pakistani spy in 1981 and 1982? THIS MAKES TOTAL SENSE! Why else would would Hillary apologize to Pakistan for that time we accidentally killed dozens of their troops? That’s not the sort of thing the U.S. usually apologizes about … unless the president is on the payroll of the country whose troops we killed. What important evidence has come to light about this, and from what reputable source?

READ MORE »