Though the Obama PAC ran a ridiculously stupid commercial that implied Mitt Romney was responsible for a man's wife's cancer, Obama himself is responsible for far more unemployment than Romney.
The WSJ has the best summary of the entire debacle; apparently the man obtained another job 6 months after he lost his steel job and at this job he had insurance but didn't want to pay for his wife's health insurance too. He complained that he only made $25,000 yearly, had a mortgage and his daughter's college bills to pay and couldn't afford the health insurance.
This would make the college tuition more of a priority than his wife' health, apparently, which, according to the Obama campaign makes Sobbit a deadbeat who didn't choose to buy health care, wouldn't it?
Mr. Soptic said that his wife was receiving health insurance through her employer at the time he lost his job at GST Steel, though she later suffered an injury, left her job and lost her insurance coverage. He could not say precisely when this occurred.
Mr. Soptic said that after he lost his job, he found work as a school custodian about six months later and had the option to put her on his insurance plan. But he opted not to, he said, because he could not afford the more than $350 monthly premium on the $25,000 salary he was making, on top of paying his mortgage and a daughter's college tuition. Ilyona Soptic was diagnosed with cancer in 2006 and died that year.So Sobbit's wife died in 2006, 7 years after Romney left Bain but he's responsible. Huh.
Now the Obama campaign has the GALL to accuse Romney of politicizing Obama's elimination of Delphi's pensions, even though Romney's only mention of it was in a May web video.
Delphi pensioners who were non-union had their pensions cut by the U.S. Treasury Department by 70%, while the unions lost nothing, much similar to the auto bailout, which, God forbid, Obama wants to repeat in other industries.
The Daily Caller:
Romney and his campaign have remained silent about emails The Daily Caller obtained and first published Tuesday, which show the U.S. Treasury Department, led by Timothy Geithner, was the driving force behind the termination of the Delphi workers’ pensions.
The emails contradict the sworn testimony of Obama administration figures who said the decision came from the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). That federal agency handles private sector pension benefits issues; its charter calls for independent representation of pension beneficiaries’ interestsOf course, this administration in true heroic fashion lied about their involvement. DC again:
The internal government emails contradict sworn testimony, in federal court and before Congress, given by several Obama administration figures. They also indicate that the administration misled lawmakers and the courts about the sequence of events surrounding the termination of those non-union pensions, and that administration figures violated federal law.In 2011, the San Francisco Examiner detailed why the entire auto bailout was really such a bust, including the shafting that the government gave to Delphi:
The story is no better at General Motors, which supposedly just posted its biggest profit in a decade this quarter. But GM did not make that money selling cars — it came from the one-time sale of a subsidiary company. GM had bought Delphi, one of its troubled suppliers, for $2.5 billion in 2009. Then Delphi dumped $6.25 billion worth of its pension obligations onto the federal government’s Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp. With those debts gone, GM sold Delphi for $3.8 billion this quarter. Voila — huge profits for GM, all at the expense of the pensioners who fund and could someday depend on the PBGC (and possibly taxpayers too).
Doesn't this sound exactly like what Sobbit accuses Romney of doing in the Obama ad?
And this isn't the only example of Obama's Bane.
Do we mention Boeing and South Carolina?
Or the auto dealerships who got shafted according to their political affiliations?
And Obama's attempt to trash/fire/remove/destroy Ed DeMarco, who's the only one standing between his administration's ability to buy the votes of homeowners' whose mortgages are underwater?
Obama's banes may yet undo him.
Wouldn't that be something.