Welcome to Democratic Convention Watch

Donate to DCW

Follow DCW on Twitter
Follow DCW on Facebook
2016 Democratic Convention
2016 Republican Convention Charlotte Host Committee
2010 Census

Follow DCW on Google+
DCW iPhone App Info
A Guide to DemConWatch
2008 Democratic Primary Links
2008 Democratic National Convention Links
DemConWatch Archives '05-'08
DemConWatch Speeches
Inauguration Information
DCW Store

Mobile Version


Advanced Search

This site is not affiliated with the DNC, DNCC, or any campaign.

Email us at

Blog Roll
Frontloading HQ
The Field
Swing State Project

DCW in the News
St. Louis Channel 2 News
Wall Street Journal
The New York Times
US News & World Report

What Mitt REALLY Said About Firing People

by: DocJess

Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 13:44:00 PM EST

Earlier today, we had a piece on health insurance, and how many companies are leaving the field. Then, a nice half hour video on how Mittens is committed to destroying American companies. Traveling around the internet now is a 15 second video of Mittens saying he likes being able to fire people. But we have the whole piece, in context. And it's even worse.

Mitt is under the impression that people have all SORTS of choices in health insurance and they should be able to just pick whichever one they want. Mitt has never heard of "denial for pre-existing conditions" nor add-on fees based on age, nor bottom-of-the-barrel insurance with an upside limit of $10,000 a year and a $1,500 deductible, nor even the idea that premiums plus deductibles and co-pays may put health care out of reach even with insurance, unless you go the bankruptcy route. 

Mittens lives in his own little world. Oh yeah, he really did say he likes the option of firing people. I'm wondering if he wants to fire corporations, too, or just people people.

DocJess :: What Mitt REALLY Said About Firing People

Follow Democratic Convention Watch on Facebook and Twitter. Iphone/Android apps available.

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

I agree with Romney (0.00 / 0)
No, I'm not being snarky.

On this, I agree with him. I always preferred the "balkanized" route to HCR (I explain what I mean by it in this post.)

When I had my one-person small business, it drove me nuts that health insurance was not tax deductible for me. But that was in 1988. Within a few years, the law changed, and it became tax deductible for the self-employed--so Romney is flat-out wrong on the facts there--he's about twenty years behind the times. (He's mixing two issues--buying insurance on your own when you've got an employer, which is currently not tax-deductible, and buying insurance when self-employed, which is.)

And yes, I like being able to fire people who provide services to me too. I like when my bank or my cell phone provider or my plumber screws up to be able to fire them. I like being able to fire politicians when they screw up, too. I wish I could fire the post office when they screw up--there was a point about a year and a half ago when I would have if I could have--but I can't.  

"Firing" people (4.00 / 1)
This is an issue of wording and semantics, in part, but mostly it's a question of whether or not a corporation is a person. Your bank and cell phone providers ARE NOT PEOPLE. You cannot fire them, you can instead select a different provider. Your plumber is not a person in his/her role as plumber, it's his/her BUSINESS and he/she needs to earn your patronage.

When I was 23, I had to fire someone. I had to take him into a room, and tell him that starting the next day he no longer had a job at our company. I cried my eyes out the night before, and afterwards. I had no choice but to fire him because my bosses gave me no option. He was about 10 years older than I was, he was married, had a kid, and one on the way. I liked him. Firing a person is more difficult than you know, unless you've done it.

"Firing" a politician isn't "firing" -- someone has put him/herself up for election, and knows that there will be one winner and 1 or more losers. It's a risk the person takes when filing for the ballot.

Let's call it what it is: Mitt probably does like firing people - likes holding their lives in his hands. It bespeaks an inherent cruelty, and a belief that numbers matter more than people.

Back in the 80's there were a number of books about Wall Street arbitragers and what they did and why - it was all about the numbers. One anecdote from one of the books was about RJR-Nabisco and their merger. The numbers said that they could fire the 3rd shift of Oreo makers because it wasn't profitable to pay at the increased wages for third shift work. Problem was, and you may remember this, there ended up not being enough Oreos on the shelf -- it was then the most popular cookie in the world. Shot themselves in the proverbial foot, the arbitragers did. But mostly what they damaged was all the people they fired off the line.  

[ Parent ]
True (0.00 / 0)
That's the thing about gaffes--they sting most when they reveal something people already kind of knew was true. If Obama had put this using those words, we'd think it sounded a little odd, but it wouldn't be a big deal. Romney saying it reminds us of all of the rest of his history and attitude.

[ Parent ]
firing <insert here> (0.00 / 0)
I had to fire someone once.  I was only sorry I had not been able to fire him sooner, due to the hoops HR had me jump through.  He was a complete goldbricker and had badly sabotaged his one-person project's schedule by faking progress reports.

Come to find out he had done the same thing in a previous group.  I'd "inherited" him when I became a manager because my manager wanted to "give him another chance" and didn't want to prejudice me against him by telling me his record.

If I'd known his record I would have required evidence of progress instead of just reports, and detected the problem much sooner.

Why did he do zero work?  I have no idea.  He was impervious to suggestions that he get any kind of help.

I do think of changing providers are firing in some cases, if, for example, they have lousy customer service.  I fired State Farm.

[ Parent ]
I love the Post Office (0.00 / 0)
Out here in the boonies, they are much better than UPS and FedEx.

The Post Office does not put heavy boxes against my outward opening door despite my repeated requests not to do this.  

The Post Office does not tell me too bad, nothing we can do when a package they claim to have delivered is nowhere to be seen.

The Post Office does not leave a package (laptop) requiring a signature for delivery without a signature, and then when I can't find it and call them, send their driver back to scream at me that I'm a thief.

The Post Office has even rung my door bell if my mail has piled up in the mailbox, to be sure I'm okay.

[ Parent ]
the problem is that his reality is so far removed from the average person (0.00 / 0)
i am not a corporate guy, but i have considered, even applied for and interviewed for positions within large companies because i have a preexisting condition that makes me uninsurable. in the current market, we cannot fire our insurance companies, in fact, they can and do fire us, and often they do it after taking our money!

Which Romney? (0.00 / 0)
The problem, as is often the case with Romney, is that it's unclear which Romney we're listening to at any given time.

I think Romneycare was a pretty darn good thing to do, and it did deal with preexisting conditions, and gave the opportunity to fire insurance companies:


Obamacare is trying to work toward the same thing, but it's not there yet.

So yeah, I give him credit on this one for doing something good for the people of Massachusetts. And then I take most of that credit away because he won't admit that Obama did something good for the whole United States.

[ Parent ]
Flawed Sounding and Factually Erroneous (0.00 / 0)

To me, there are two big problems.

First, as noted by the other postings, it is simply odd sounding and confuses "firing" with simply not buying a product or service.  When I choose to go to a different mechanic to repair my car, I normally don't say that I have fired my former mechanic.

Second, as I understand the Affordable Care Act, it is not that much different from what Romney adopted in Massachusetts.  If, like me, you are fortunate enough to work for an employer who still provides health care, the Affordable Care Act allows you to keep that insurance, meaning that your employer chooses which insurance company to hire or fire.  If you are unfortunate enough to have to find your own policy, the Affordable Care Act will allow you to go on a state-run exchange to find the best company to hire (and permit you to fire your previous company).  Thus, this claim is the recurring Republican blatant lie about the Affordable Care Act being socialized medicine like Britain or Canada. 




Forget your username or password?

Make a New Account

Currently 0 user(s) logged on.

Subscribe to Posts

DemConWatch on Twitter
DemConWatch on Facebook

View blog authority

Add to Technorati Favorites

Wikio - Top Blogs - Politics

Who links to my website?

Sign the Petition (A)
Powered by: SoapBlox