Why Is Mitt Romney So Incredibly Weird?

[Toro]

I might be replaceable, but I'm useful, unlike you worthless parasites on Wall Street.

You add nothing, make nothing, produce nothing. All you do is profit off the hard work of others.... and people are getting wise to you.

enjoy the last dance, the party will be over soon enough.

lol

I've done more to help the working man that you claim to speak for than you, bigot, I can assure of that.

Toro, you know I like you, but Joe (and Swagger two posts later) both make good points.

I think both the unions and uber wealthy have over stepped their bounds, but this is a result of the latter overstepping back in the day, leading to the formation of the former.

However, some unions just get out of control..might even bring down a PM

Trail of HSU millions turns up risk of 'cosy or frankly illegal practices'

I'm neither pro nor anti-union. And as you know, I've spent a good deal of time criticizing the right. I'm not arguing that middle class wages haven't stagnated, nor that the financial industry hasn't captured Washington. But the anti-capitalist policies JoeBigot advocates are total failures, recipes for continued stagnation and inevitable decline.

 

[JoeB131]

Guy, you are a fake.. the republicans here all think you're a fake.

Jake the Fake... Even worked it into your nickname.

rofl

That's hilarious coming from you. Is there anyone on the right here who thinks you're a Republican?

The ones capable of thinking... which is a smaller and smaller group in the GOP these days.

It's kind of like that scene in the Untouchables where Kevin Costner identifies himself a Federal Agent after a humiliating raid gone wrong, and Sean Connery let's him go because no one who wasn't one would claim it.

Of course, given that means I'd associate myself with Colonel Batshit screaming about 80 Communists in Congress, it's kind of a step down for me to admit it.

You jokers are the ones driving out Hatch and Lugar and Spector and Colin Powell with your batshit insanity which your supposedly "moderate" standard bearer can't bring himself to denounce.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm neither pro nor anti-union. And as you know, I've spent a good deal of time criticizing the right. I'm not arguing that middle class wages haven't stagnated, nor that the financial industry hasn't captured Washington. But the anti-capitalist policies JoeBigot advocates are total failures, recipes for continued stagnation and inevitable decline.

We had our greatest prosperity when the workforce was unionized. The Japanese and Europeans have stronger unionization than we do. (IN Japan, the unions can fire the CEO's).

Tell me who makes the better cars or the better TV's.

 

[Toro]

Guy, you are a fake.. the republicans here all think you're a fake.

Jake the Fake... Even worked it into your nickname.

rofl

That's hilarious coming from you. Is there anyone on the right here who thinks you're a Republican?

The ones capable of thinking... which is a smaller and smaller group in the GOP these days.

It's kind of like that scene in the Untouchables where Kevin Costner identifies himself a Federal Agent after a humiliating raid gone wrong, and Sean Connery let's him go because no one who wasn't one would claim it.

Of course, given that means I'd associate myself with Colonel Batshit screaming about 80 Communists in Congress, it's kind of a step down for me to admit it.

You jokers are the ones driving out Hatch and Lugar and Spector and Colin Powell with your batshit insanity which your supposedly "moderate" standard bearer can't bring himself to denounce.

Name them.

 

[Toro]

I'm neither pro nor anti-union. And as you know, I've spent a good deal of time criticizing the right. I'm not arguing that middle class wages haven't stagnated, nor that the financial industry hasn't captured Washington. But the anti-capitalist policies JoeBigot advocates are total failures, recipes for continued stagnation and inevitable decline.

We had our greatest prosperity when the workforce was unionized. The Japanese and Europeans have stronger unionization than we do. (IN Japan, the unions can fire the CEO's).

Tell me who makes the better cars or the better TV's.

Unions can fire the CEO? Really, uby. I've never heard of that before, and I've done a bit in Japan on corporate governance.

 

[Amelia]

I'm neither pro nor anti-union. And as you know, I've spent a good deal of time criticizing the right. I'm not arguing that middle class wages haven't stagnated, nor that the financial industry hasn't captured Washington. But the anti-capitalist policies JoeBigot advocates are total failures, recipes for continued stagnation and inevitable decline.

We had our greatest prosperity when the workforce was unionized. The Japanese and Europeans have stronger unionization than we do. (IN Japan, the unions can fire the CEO's).

Tell me who makes the better cars or the better TV's.

Ummm, Joe, what kind of incentive is that to encourage unions here?

If you let unions into the company you found, they can fire you?

WTH?

 

[Dr Grump]

lol

I've done more to help the working man that you claim to speak for than you, bigot, I can assure of that.

Toro, you know I like you, but Joe (and Swagger two posts later) both make good points.

I think both the unions and uber wealthy have over stepped their bounds, but this is a result of the latter overstepping back in the day, leading to the formation of the former.

However, some unions just get out of control..might even bring down a PM

Trail of HSU millions turns up risk of 'cosy or frankly illegal practices'

I'm neither pro nor anti-union. And as you know, I've spent a good deal of time criticizing the right. I'm not arguing that middle class wages haven't stagnated, nor that the financial industry hasn't captured Washington. But the anti-capitalist policies JoeBigot advocates are total failures, recipes for continued stagnation and inevitable decline.

The problem seems to be finding a balance. New oversight legislation would help. If only Wall St wouldn't fight it. I have no problem with Wall St being a on a tighter leash. Neither should they if they are conducting good business practices...

 

[JakeStarkey]

All of this from JoeB the Republican.

 

[JoeB131]

Toro, you know I like you, but Joe (and Swagger two posts later) both make good points.

I think both the unions and uber wealthy have over stepped their bounds, but this is a result of the latter overstepping back in the day, leading to the formation of the former.

However, some unions just get out of control..might even bring down a PM

Trail of HSU millions turns up risk of 'cosy or frankly illegal practices'

I can be very critical of unions in some ways. I think the Public Service unions and some of their demands are outrageous. They've totall ruined education in this country.

My problem with the "uber-wealthy" and their apologists like Toro is that they are ultimately self-destructive to their own cause. They want a free market and people invested in it. Fine. I totally get that. But their goal is to make themselves richer by squeezing just a bit more out of the working guy.

I worked in a department that had two managers and 8 buyers in 2008. Today we have a supervisor and 4 buyers. But we still have the same amount of work. And that's the problem. Squeezing the last bit of productivity out of people until they collapse so a few guys like Romnuts can get a new Car Elevator is the quick road to the kind of "Socialism" Boro says he fears at night.

 

[Amelia]

All of this from JoeB the Republican.

I easily believe that Joe is or was a Republican. I think in his introductory thread he spoke of it as a past condition.

Sometimes you seem slightly to the left of him. Sometimes he seems slightly to the left of you.

That's why I find it interesting to see you guys discuss issues -- much more nuanced conversation than some pairs would have -- ... well ... I'm pretty sure I saw you discuss issues once but then it devolved into name calling so maybe I was only imagining it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I backed JoeB into a corner on something about Mormonism, he name called, and I retaliated, so, yeah, Amelia, we are not what you call 'nuanced' conversationalists at the moment. But I like your thoughtful comment, I appreciate it.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm neither pro nor anti-union. And as you know, I've spent a good deal of time criticizing the right. I'm not arguing that middle class wages haven't stagnated, nor that the financial industry hasn't captured Washington. But the anti-capitalist policies JoeBigot advocates are total failures, recipes for continued stagnation and inevitable decline.

We had our greatest prosperity when the workforce was unionized. The Japanese and Europeans have stronger unionization than we do. (IN Japan, the unions can fire the CEO's).

Tell me who makes the better cars or the better TV's.

Ummm, Joe, what kind of incentive is that to encourage unions here?

If you let unions into the company you found, they can fire you?

WTH?

I would say if my workers wanted to fire me, I was pretty seriously messing up.

And if there was discontent openly talked about, I could probably address it.

Story time. My first job out of the army was at a Pet Supply Distributor as floor supervisor. They treated the employees like shit. Most of my time was trying to talk the managers out of some of their more terrible ideas. (Keep in mind, they went though six floor managers in a year and a half before I got the job.) Now anyone who complained openly was fired, so they just got passive-aggressive in their discontent. Petty theft that everyone looked the other way on, not rotating stock until it went bad,

I managed to make some improvements, some employees didn't like that I supported management when I disagreed with it, management didnt' like I resisted some of the more ludicrous punishments they wanted to inflict on people. But the thing was, relationships were so bad there that the place was effectively referred to as "Dysfunctional Pet Supply"... by the customers!

Eventually, the head office closed down teh Chicago Branch and tried to run the business out of Milwaukee, which is where the owners lived. They were completely out of business a year later.

 

[JoeB131]

I backed JoeB into a corner on something about Mormonism, he name called, and I retaliated, so, yeah, Amelia, we are not what you call 'nuanced' conversationalists at the moment. But I like your thoughtful comment, I appreciate it.

I'm sorry, was I asleep when all that happened? Or is this your altered view of reality where you can rip Reagan and Bush and still call yourself a Republican?

 

[George Costanza]

He suggests a brilliantly designed politician android with an operating system still clearly in beta.

I totally agree. His smile is too brilliant, too ready, too phony. At any moment, I expect him to suddenly freeze and then start moving some part of his body rapidly back and forth, as if a circuit went out somwhere. At the same time, I expect him to start repeating a phrase over and over again: "We must never, never, never . . . . . "

I don't trust him as far as I could throw him. He impresses me as being a world class opportunist who does not have a sincere bone in his body.

Thank God he is going to get his ass handed to him in November.

 

[JakeStarkey]

One, you can't be balanced about Mormonism (you froth when you think about it), and two, of course a Ford man can dislike the religious right that manipulated Reagan and the neo-cons manipulated the young Bush. I thought Bush the Elder was super,

 

[JoeB131]

One, you can't be balanced about Mormonism (you froth when you think about it), and two, of course a Ford man can dislike the religious right that manipulated Reagan and the neo-cons manipulated the young Bush. I thought Bush the Elder was super,

I think my position on Mormonism may not be balanced (which is just to say, I don't cow down to political correctness and say, "Oh, well, those are your beliefs, I guess I got to respect that.") but it is sincere.

I am trying to tone down the anti-Mormon Criticism and concentrate on other aspects of Romney's flaws. But as Michael Corleone said, "The more I get out, the more they drag me back in!"

We'd probably agree, the religious right has too much influence. I think, however, that the religious right doesn't have the power you think it has. What do they have for 32 years of blind support of the GOP? What is the one thing that got changed in their favor for helping elect three Republican Presidents?

I'm also kind of supsicious of any Republican who uses the term "Neo-Con". I think it's one of those terms that gets tossed around as a pejorative without a real definition. But if you think they are going to have less influence in a Romney administration than they had in the Bush-43 one, I think you are kind of deluding yourself.

 

[Dot Com]

I backed JoeB into a corner on something about Mormonism, he name called, and I retaliated, so, yeah, Amelia, we are not what you call 'nuanced' conversationalists at the moment. But I like your thoughtful comment, I appreciate it.

I'm sorry, was I asleep when all that happened? Or is this your altered view of reality where you can rip Reagan and Bush and still call yourself a Republican?

lol.

 

[George Costanza]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-BO46-7jymA]The Book Of Mormon: "Hello!" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JakeStarkey]

One, you can't be balanced about Mormonism (you froth when you think about it), and two, of course a Ford man can dislike the religious right that manipulated Reagan and the neo-cons manipulated the young Bush. I thought Bush the Elder was super,

I think my position on Mormonism may not be balanced (which is just to say, I don't cow down to political correctness and say, "Oh, well, those are your beliefs, I guess I got to respect that.") but it is sincere.

I am trying to tone down the anti-Mormon Criticism and concentrate on other aspects of Romney's flaws. But as Michael Corleone said, "The more I get out, the more they drag me back in!"

We'd probably agree, the religious right has too much influence. I think, however, that the religious right doesn't have the power you think it has. What do they have for 32 years of blind support of the GOP? What is the one thing that got changed in their favor for helping elect three Republican Presidents?

I'm also kind of supsicious of any Republican who uses the term "Neo-Con". I think it's one of those terms that gets tossed around as a pejorative without a real definition. But if you think they are going to have less influence in a Romney administration than they had in the Bush-43 one, I think you are kind of deluding yourself.

Lack of balance and kowtowing or not to PC does not follow. You get stepped on because you can't fail to give respect and then expect it in return. Yes, the religious right is as powerful as I think it to be; did you see how it pulled GHWB to the dark side? Neo-con is an excellent term for describing warmongers who wish to project American hard power overseas and recreate nations in our image: it won't work, as proved in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will break economies and the nation's morale. I think the religiocrats and neo-cons will have far less power in a Romney administration than in that of the younger Bush.

 

[JoeB131]

Lack of balance and kowtowing or not to PC does not follow. You get stepped on because you can't fail to give respect and then expect it in return.

No, I get whiny snivelly bayitches who are upset that I point out what you are all signing on to because you think Romney might get you something you want. I refuse to. I've been consistant. I've said I wouldn't support him from day one.

Yes, the religious right is as powerful as I think it to be; did you see how it pulled GHWB to the dark side?

Umm, no, not really. The only issue where Bush really changed his mind on was Abortion, at a time when the whole GOP was going in the pro-life direction.

Neo-con is an excellent term for describing warmongers who wish to project American hard power overseas and recreate nations in our image: it won't work, as proved in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will break economies and the nation's morale.

By your own definition, then, FDR and Truman were "Neo-Cons"... They most certainly did try to project hard power on Germany and Japan and they did "recreate" them in our own image. Or at the least, a New Deal Image of what a country should like. They got stuff in they could never get passed the GOP in this country.

I think the religiocrats and neo-cons will have far less power in a Romney administration than in that of the younger Bush.

I think quite the contrary, These folks would have more influence.

Take the Neo-cons, first. Sorry, they really are the majority of the GOP's military and foreign policy apparaticks... and really, it's not like Romney has a deep bench of these people to tap back on. Lot's of Wall Street Goons, not a lot of guys who ever put on a uniform. So these will be the first guys he'll tap when he's reading "How to Salute".

For the religious right, the thing is, the LDS are really as much another faction within the religious right. They are just as nuts and crazy as the Baptists. Except Romney can't really risk offending them. He's not going to have the lot of them go off the reservation by appointing a Pro-Choice justice.