Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thomas Veil, Jun 19, 2012.
Really, Mitt? If you can't stand that kind of heat, what would you be like as president?
Run romney, run romney, run, run, run.
I know Lawyers who have more character, class and balls than Romney.
I find his campaign stop another interesting "out of touch" tidbit. This man has been so isolated that he doesn't even know what a doughnut is called and thinks "touch tone" screens are amazing.
$10,000 bets during Presidential debates
Dogs strapped to roofs of cars
Elevators for cars
Private elevators for himself
Bankruptcies and foreclosures that should just be allowed to hit bottom.
And somehow this man is supposed to relate to the average person and govern this county? When he can't even relate to us? How? We're all just numbers on some spreadsheet to him.
I never thought I would see the day, that equating someone with lawyers was actually insulting to lawyers.
That day has arrived.
I think I must dredge up an old word, derived from the French, for this dick.
What's wrong with an old fashioned 'snake oil salesman'
The President is supposed to be the nation's cream of the crop. The best person in the country. The momentary King, really. Why should a President be expected to be able to relate to the people any more than a CEO be expected to relate to the employees.
This incident is not any different from Bush events, at which all the attendees were per-screened to provide for a favourable audience.
Edit: though I have to admit, holding an event outside a convenience store seems a bit, well, irregal.
If not the leader, then who? I wouldn't mind as much if he would admit that he is out of touch and can't relate to the average person due to wealth and now security needs. Fine. But instead political campaigns try and pretend that their candidate can relate by visiting all sorts of places like gas stations, fast food places and roadside diners that you KNOW they would never be at normally.
It's just complete pandering and completely dishonest. Don't try to relate to someone by visiting a place one time in your life. Don't say "I'm unemployed too" when you have millions of dollars and are talking to people who don't. That's the kind of stuff I object to.
And saying that whats happening in Syria is a ray of sunshine doesn't help much either. He's amazingly clueless with the things he says. So I question how Romney could ever run the country properly. In order to fix a situation, you have to understand the problem in the first place. If he thinks he is relating to the unemployed by saying he's one too, or if he thinks a war torn country is a "ray of sunshine" he has demonstrated that he in fact does NOT understand the plight of the unemployed or the rest of the world for that matter. And no amount of Wawa store visits will fix that.
Do you ever watch the show "The Big Bang Theory?" In the show is a character Sheldon, whose IQ is only matched by his complete inability to understand his friends, leading to humorous incidents and statements. He's a fine, we're told, theoretical physicist, the elite of thinking people everywhere and yet he is stymied by the simplest of human problems.
Right, which should give one pause. He's acting like George W. Bush and pre-screening his audiences, to inoculate himself from having to deal with someone who disagrees with him. That's not leadership, that's royalty, the inbred children who say things like "let them eat cake" without understanding the simple reality that people without bread can't have cake because they are literally starving.
I seem to recall seeing a statistic some while back that suggested that the person with the greater degree of royal lineage always or almost always won the presidential election. This, to me, indicates some sort of defect in the political system.
Did Rawmoney invent pandering and dishonesty? Or did he merely earn a Ph.D. in it?
I think Romney has taken it to a new level.
Here's a good place to see how bad it realy is. Link is for volume 23. Links to volumes 1-22 are below the arrticle.
Because the people vote for him? BTW, a good CEO relates and has empathy towards his employees, even the bottom rung employees.
No one ever said he invented it. But he definitely has taken it to a new art form. The man lies more then ANY politician I have ever seen in my entire lifetime.
He has an endowed chair teaching it. All politicians could learn at the Master's feet.
Who uses the term "Touch-Tone" nowadays?
It's from the 70's which, incidentally, is probably the last time he had to dial his own telephone calls. Such a chore.
That would probably be Obama. Rmoney's family was part of a cult of polygymists that hid in Mexico to avoid being thrown in prison. Doesn't sound very royal.
Yeah, I want to see Willard's proof of citizenship. Which wife was his mother? How can we be sure it was not one of the Mexican ones?
Grandmother, but yeah, how do we know he's really white, or for that matter, rich? For all we know, he could have lost everything in the GWB recession. Speaking of which, if he's such an expert on financial matters, why hasn't anyone asked him about all the brilliant predictions he made about the impending financial crisis that was brought on by his party? Why hasn't anyone asked him about the brilliant moves he made during the downturn that made him so much money and created so many jobs.
Here is the thing: a CEO or surrogate company manager looks at the balance sheet. Workers are a net liability. In order to maximize profitability, one has to minimize costs. Hence, Mitt likes to fire people, because they cost him money. Creating jobs is not the goal of a capitalist, money is. I doubt he ever even saw the face of one person he surplussed.
But this experience is quite helpful when it comes to ruinning a country, making people's lives better (some of them, at least). Government should function exactly like a corporation or there is something wrong with it.
Even if he did, with spouse and kids in tow, I doubt he would loose any sleep on his white-satin sheets, 600 thread count.
That phrase 'let them eat cake' is often misinterpreted. French law at the time required bakers to sell brioche (made from finely milled flour) at the same price as bread (made from less refined flour), if there was no bread available.
So far from a callous statement it should be interpreted as an instruction for bakers to sell the more expensive brioche (translated as cake) at bread prices.
At best you can accuse Marie Antoinette as being ignorant of (or not having been informed of) the fact that there was no flour at all available.
Anyway there is scant evidence that she ever actually said that line.
I was using the phrase as it's understood in popular mythology, but you're correct on all counts. I was wondering if someone was going to bring that up.
Exactly? Really? Cause corporations sometimes lay off ALL of their staff and go out of business. Doesn't sound like a good strategy for a government to follow. I don't think the capitol, the White House and all the buildings on the National Mall would look good all boarded up. Do you?
That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. While there are things that govt. can learn from corporations and, at times, act like them, to say that they should function exactly as one is simply crazy.
And it was meant to sound ridiculous. Willard has the business mindset, voting for him is voting for running the country like a business. I am inclined to feel that that would probably not be the best strategery.